(Cal, i was stirred deeply by your last letter...recalled how lucky i was to have et you at a conference in Provo or Salt Lake City maybe almost two decades

Message 1 of 10
, Dec 20, 2012

0 Attachment

(Cal, i was stirred deeply by your last letter...recalled how lucky i was to have et you at a conference in Provo or Salt Lake City maybe almost two decades ago)

Ancient Waterways friends. Happy Holidays!

Minnesota researcher Larry Furo sent an update today to another group I have great interest in. It is a lengthy, but sincere, well-written letter and the latest word from Ashfield, Massachuetts stonemason, James Vieira who has been mentioned at AWS before by some of you, though i think his last name at our site was spelled incorrectly. At least two members know him personally and have expressed great respect for him. Again, a broad subject and lengthy letter from him. But I and many here and diffusionists as well as many academics as well have long held much interest and may find it well worth stepping further into the diligent efforts of James Vierira.

First, a somewhat random link about him first (i fell on blue ice covered with right inches of snow in a blizzard this AM trying to pick up a Christmas tree before my children from three states come north for our weekend holiday celebration. I hurt my neck something fierce, waived off an ambulance and cannot linger long here).

Next, i hope will follow his most recent public letter he posted at his Facebook page under this title: Stone Builders, Mound Builders and the Giants of Ancient America | Jim Vieira

Scanned, for those not signed into FB, from James E. Vieira, his response to recent censorship, etc.:

"After 120,000 views, the #1 most watched tedx video in the world during the month it was up, my talk has been removed. I am posting the resons given and my response. A long but interesting read about how censorship can happen. Thanks Jim

At 2:03 -- You claim: "These structures are so staggering that people don't even think they exist still." In fact, there is a general archaeological consensus about the impressive civilization demonstrated by the moundbuilders in Cahokia and similar sites.

2. At 4:05 -- You claim: "The moundbuilders who built all kinds of structures." All evidence for the moundbuilders' architecture suggests that they built with sod packets and wood.

3. At 4:19 -- You mention carbon-dating but do not specify what was carbon-dated. You cannot carbon-date stone. Again at 6:00.

4. At 7:26 -- You mention Mayan theories. Since the recent deciphering of almost the full Mayan script, the astronomical preoccupation attributed to Mayan writings has been largely discredited. Most of the numbers found in the Mayan script are now believed to be dates of births, coronations and wars.

5. At 9:15 -- You share newspaper clippings from the 19th century, including quotes from Abraham Lincoln, and claim they are evidence of giants. In fact, as one of our experts writes, "Skeletal hoaxes were common in the 19th century (e.g., Piltdown Man, the Cardiff Giant, and Barnum & Bailey Fiji mermaids [now at Harvard's Peabody Museum]). If (and this is a big if) the 8-foot skeleton is real, it could be a case of medical gigantism, but it is more likely a case of exaggeration."

6. With respect to the theories of gigantism, the TEDx fact checkers spoke to an expert who researched Middle Woodland and Mississippian skeletal collections at the Center for American Archaeology (CAA), based in Kampsville, IL, in 2007. The CAA is one of the largest repositories of excavated Woodland and Mississippian skeletal remains in the nation, and their osteological collections are available for student and scholarly study. One expert stated "I can assure you that the archaeological Woodland and Mississippian populations were not giants. In some cases, one can observe a slight decrease in average height (a few centimeters) with the transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture. This is a trend that is observed in many cultures that undergo an agricultural transition, and is likely related to shorter nursing times and increased early childhood grain consumption (maximum height is highly correlated to childhood protein consumption, so a high reliance on grain during childhood tends to result in shorter stature)."

7. At 12:49 -- "Bones crumbled away because they weren't mummified." Skeletal preservation and mummification are unrelated processes. Plenty of skeletons survive in New England, and the disappearance of any and all skeletons that could lend evidence to these claims today is highly suspect.

8. With respect to repeated claims that the Smithsonian is hiding or covering up evidence, the fact checkers also heard this, as well: "In 2007 I was a visiting scientist at the Smithsonian Museum Support Center, and while it is full of amazing and bizarre material (e.g., an entire herd of elephants that Teddy Roosevelt shot occupies one floor), there is no conspiracy to cover up or hide Native American giant skeletons or artifacts. Like most museums, the Smithsonian displays less than 1% of its collections at any given time, meaning that a lot of material spends decades (or sadly centuries) in its vaults awaiting exhibition. We can debate whether or not this is responsible stewardship (a debate that would also have to include a discussion of the chronic underfunding of public museums and the economics of public education), but to portray the Smithsonian today as part of some sort of a conspiracy of `misinformation and corruption' to cover up Native American history by hiding giant moundbuilder skeletons excavated in the 19th century is ridiculous. Smithsonian physical anthropologists have published an impressive body of literature on the analysis of their collections."

I am writing to respond to the stated reasons why my TEDX talk was removed.

1. My assertion is that the staggering structures of the Mound Builders are largely unknown by the general public. I did not state that Archaeologists were unaware of this, I simply stated that the large majority of the population has no idea that they existed. I have presented to thousands of people and always ask if anyone has ever heard of the Mound Builders and their creations; no more than a handful has said yes. Despite the astounding engineering feats and widespread construction of mind-boggling earthen pyramids and geometric forms in Ancient America this is barely discussed in high school or college education. The TED Board's assertion is a transparent attempt to portray me as lacking a basic understanding of Archaeological theory.

2. This statement is false. Actually, this helps prove my point that the works of the Mound Builders are poorly understood, even by the experts . The Mound Builders are well known for building with stone. There is absolutely an archaeological consensus for this. The Adena , Hopewell and Fort Ancient cultures built massive stone wall complexes, stone mounds and often stone temple chambers within earthen mounds. The Butler Co. site, Miami Co. site, Fort Hill, Spruce Hill and the Old Stone Fort at Tennessee are a few of the well known and universally accepted stone works of Ancient America. Spruce Hill was a 140 acre hilltop with a two and a quarter mile-long stone wall around the perimeter. A map of the site is listed in the Smithsonian's 12th annual ethnology report by the respected Cyrus Thomas who also mapped the stone fort at Flint ridge. All this info can be seen in Norman Mueller's Glenford Stone Fort and other Stone Constructions in Ohio and Beyond. From the History of Perry County Ohio 1902 is a description of the Adena stone hilltop enclosure and stone burial mound. "Archeologists from all over the land have visited here and the consensus of opinion is that the Glenford site is one of the most wonderful of fortifications....it is a fraction over 27 acres. It is made entirely of stone." Also from Gerard Fowke's Antiquities of MO. 1902 pg 65, "So far as the ability to work in stone is concerned, some stone chambers which exist in Pike County MO. have been mentioned as examples of the skill of the Mound Builders in this respect." Fowkes work is widely known and published in Smithsonian Ethnology Reports. There is complete consensus within mainstream archaeology that the Mound Builders built many structures of stone. Looks like you might have to vet your experts a little better.

3. To state to me that you cannot carbon date stone is insulting , clearly only organic material such as charcoal and bone fragments can be carbon dated. I in fact read a report in my talk from highly respected and award winning Geochrom labs in Massachusetts about the Mystery Hill site in New Hampshire. May 30th 1966 sample # GX-1608 submitted by Robert Stone as given by Archaeologist Jim Whitall. Harold W. Kruger technical director of Geochron states "you have found something very interesting from this site with a rather old date of 2995 B.P." Kruger states that there is a quite an adequate amount of material for dating. Date was 2995 B.P. +/- 180 C-14 years. Whitall also excavated carbon remains from the Putney VT. stone chamber that yielded a date of 492 A.D. and excavated one of the oldest burial mound sites in the country, the Morrill Point site in Salisbury Ma. He found three human skeletons and artifacts as well as conclusively proving a stone wall at the site through carbon dating of layers of organic material is at least 900 years old. The Maritime Archaic site at Morrill Point proved to be 7500 years old and before Mr. Whitall passed away he was joined by Dr. Bruce Bourque and the highly regarded Dr. William Fitzhugh of the Smithsonian to make sure he received credit for his amazing discovery. The L'Anse Amour stone burial mound in Labrador was expertly dated and universally recognized as being built 7500 years ago proving that stonework in the northeast goes back at least this far. All this information is readily available for anyone to see. I know a story about a bit of pseudoscience. How about the Clovis Barrier, the crowning achievement of Archaeology, rammed down our throat for 70 years now proven incontrovertibly false. If you questioned this for years you were considered a crank and a fool. Do you think a possible revaluation of other theories that are riddled with unexplained anomalies may happen soon. The only thing I ask for a fair and open discussion of anomalies but the system always demonizes the one who points these out, engages in personal attacks and a misdirection away from the evidence. Does anyone have Galileo's email address?

4. I stated that some researchers believe that the mound builder culture that started in Watson Brake La. in roughly 3400 B.C. may have been influenced by contact with societies in the Yucatan or actual migrations northward by members of that civilization. In fact there is conclusive proof of trade routes covering thousands of miles in Ancient America as evidence from artifact finds at Hopewell sites in Illinois. Mississippian era earthen pyramid temple building clearly resembles Mesoamerican stone pyramids and huge plazas such as the one at Cahokia make it perfectly reasonable to assume a possible, more southerly influence at some time. The geometry and astronomical orientations of the Mound Builders are widely accepted- see Bradley Leper the curator of Archaeology at the Ohio Historical Societies work and Lively and Horn's research on the Newark Octagon.

5. I, along with many other researchers who have written books on this matter have collected thousands of accounts in town histories, NYT articles, the Smithsonian's Ethnology reports, Scientific American and American Antiquarian of giant skeletal remains being discovered. Many of these with anatomic anomalies such as double rows of teeth. This occurs not just in 1840 but through decades of time and across thousands of miles. The discoveries continued throughout the 1920's, 30's, 40's and into the 60's. Don Dragoo was directly affiliated with the Carnegie museum of Natural History from the years 1952-1977. He is considered the last of the great Adena scholars and by the end of his career was named curator of the Carnegie's Section of Anthropology.

The following is a quote from his Mounds for the Dead. "Two outstanding traits have been noted repeatedly for this group. One is the protruding and massive chin often with prominent bilateral protrusions. (Webb and Snow, 1959 pg. 37). The second is the large size of many of the males and some of the females. A male of six feet was common and some individuals approaching seven feet have been found. Not only were these Adena people tall but the massiveness of the bones indicates powerfully built individuals. The head was generally big with a large cranial capacity." Warren K. Morehead the " Dean of American Archaeology" unearthed giant skeletons in Illinois, Connecticut and Pennsylvania. I showed accounts of all three in my presentation. At Tioga Point Pennsylvania. he uncovered 68 skeletons averaging over 7 feet with many much larger, specimens were sent to the American Investigating Museum where they were later reported stolen. Ralph Glidden working for the Heye Foundation unearthed 3,781 skeletons averaging 7 feet with the largest 9 foot 2 inches on Catalina Island CA. I have numerous pictures of these finds including a picture from the Santa Barbara museum in 1959 of these giant skeleton finds. This is not a case of gigantism, countless accounts speak of dozens of skeletons being uncovered, often with bizarre anatomic anomalies.

Alex Hrdlicka, the first head of the Smithsonian Division of Anthropology starting in 1903 closed the door on the matter of giant skeletal finds being reported. He guided the Smithsonian to attack and marginalize all this information but he could not erase the Smithsonian's own Ethnology reports so he claimed that "giants are no more" and that an inability to measure correctly and understand human anatomy properly was the reason why these things were previously reported. Hrdlicka believed in Pre-Nazi eugenics, thought no civilization existed in America before 4000 years ago and zealously attacked and intimidated anyone who challenged these ideas- calling Louis Leaky a heretic to his face and destroying the career of Warren K. Morehead. Hrdlicka is quoted in the Science News Letter v13 #353 1928 p21 as claiming "the greatest danger before the American people is the blending of the Negro tenth of the population into the superior blood of the white race." In 1937 he published findings in his Journal of Physical Anthropology to "prove that the negro race is phylogenetically a closer approach to primitive man than the white race." And just for good measure in 1927 endorsed findings comparing African babies with young apes.

Before Hrdlicka's reign there were no denials of giant skeleton finds. Hrdlicka along with many of his white supremacist colleagues at the Institution purged new evidence and marginalized and intimidated all who stood in the way of portraying the races of Ancient America as anything other than unsophisticated. Through cranial measurement Hrdlicka concluded that Native Americans along with African Americans were inferior to the white race. As geologist Kirk Bryan told his students during the reign of Hrdrickla "if you ever find evidence of human life in a context which is ancient, bury it carefully but do not forget about it."(from The First American: A study of North American Archaeology 1971.) Anthropologists and Archaeologists do not recognize this phenomena, they are reading texts and scientific journals that have been censored of these accounts. Professionals read over and over again about normal sized accounts and rightfully think the whole thing is preposterous. I never claimed that all the Mound Builders were giants or that they were the architects of the mounds. I am simply stating that there were thousands of giant skeletal remains uncovered in Ancient America oftentimes in the burial mounds such as the Grave Creek mound in WV. From the Charleston Daily Mail October 22nd 1922, "Archaeologists investigating the mound dug out a skeleton of a female. The skeleton was 7 foot 4 inches tall and the jawbone would easily fit over the face of a man weighing 160 pounds. An 8 foot male skeleton was also found." Once again, this strange anatomic anomaly of a massive jawbone like I found throughout the town histories of New England.

6 I believe response 5 also answers 6, I will say however you mention redditskeptic as a source of your investigation. The site specializes in a series of ad hominem attacks, bad faith arguments, invisible battles with straw men and personal insults. Essentially an endless stream of infantile drivel, it is not a place for objective and open-minded evaluation of evidence by anyone's standards. They continually assail Deepak Chopra for scientifically unproven theories such as the reality of "Chakras". By your new standards I suppose you will have to take down his talks also, he certainly endorses theories determined pseudoscientific by professionals.

7 Bones crumbling to dust is something to be found over and over again in the historical literature including the Smithsonian's own Ethnology reports. I was reaching for words such as mummification or preservation trying to theorize why some bones crumbled to dust and others didn't. I was just trying to share that many remains were measured, examined often determined to have strange anatomic anomalies before they crumbled to dust, some but by no means all.

8 Did the expert who visited the Smithsonian's museums support center happen to make it over to the David H. Koch's Hall of Human Origins permanent installation, where an interactive game tells us that in the future humans may adapt to climate change by "building underground cities, growing short compact bodies with curved spines to better move around in tight spaces." I am not talking about mermaids and Barnum and Bailey hoaxes, were there over one hundred mermaid accounts from leading scientists of the time published in the New York Times? I am talking about thousands of accounts from the likes of Moorehead, Webb, Dragoo, Norris, other Anthropologists, Archaeologists, Professors, Doctors, Chief Justices and ordinary citizens. They were reporting what they saw before their own eyes not a discussion of their religious and political beliefs. How do you tell someone who puts a skull over their head, fits a jawbone over their face or reports double rows of teeth that they don't understand human anatomy?

Your reasons for pulling my video are an attempt to portray me as an unsophisticated amateur that was taken in by some grand hoax. What I did was read through a series of town history, Smithsonian Ethnology and NYT reports. I was not advocating a tricky, dangerous and unproven health cure but just trying to share interesting information from the leading and most respected Scientific Journals and sources of the time. Any disinterested teenager can assemble a hundred of these accounts over a weekend with the help of Google books. I have a large number of accounts that state that the Smithsonian in fact received many of these giant skeletal remains. So, why again was my video taken down? The bottom line is that I guess this is not an idea worth sharing because it reveals corruption and cover-ups at an institution whose misguided actions are open for anyone to see with a little historical detective work. Not wanting to speak with me or allow me to debate these reasons before removing the video is very troubling. I would hope you would do me the professional courtesy of whenever or wherever you list the reasons my talk was taken down you also allow people to see my response. "When a well packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and it's speaker a raving lunatic." Dresden James.

I saw Vieira s video and sent the link to a couple of NEARA members who saw the same thing I did: practically all of his photographs are borrowed from the

Message 2 of 10
, Dec 20, 2012

0 Attachment

I saw Vieira's video and sent the link to a couple of NEARA members who saw the same thing I did: practically all of his photographs are "borrowed" from the internet. All his information is secondary. The connection of giant skeletons to the stone chambers has no evidence.

(Cal, i was stirred deeply by your last letter...recalled how lucky i was to have et you at a conference in Provo or Salt Lake City maybe almost two decades ago)

Ancient Waterways friends. Happy Holidays!

Minnesota researcher Larry Furo sent an update today to another group I have great interest in. It is a lengthy, but sincere, well-written letter and the latest word from Ashfield, Massachuetts stonemason, James Vieira who has been mentioned at AWS before by some of you, though i think his last name at our site was spelled incorrectly. At least two members know him personally and have expressed great respect for him. Again, a
broad subject and lengthy letter from him. But I and many here and diffusionists as well as many academics as well have long held much interest and may find it well worth stepping further into the diligent efforts of James Vierira.

First, a somewhat random link about him first (i fell on blue ice covered with right inches of snow in a blizzard this AM trying to pick up a Christmas tree before my children from three states come north for our weekend holiday celebration. I hurt my neck something fierce, waived off an ambulance and cannot linger long here).

Next, i hope will follow his most recent public letter he posted at his Facebook page under this title: Stone Builders, Mound Builders and the Giants of Ancient America |
Jim Vieira

Scanned, for those not signed into FB, from James E. Vieira, his response to recent censorship, etc.:

"After 120,000 views, the #1 most watched tedx video in the world during the month it was up, my talk has been removed. I am posting the resons given and my response. A long but interesting read about how censorship can happen. Thanks Jim

At 2:03 -- You claim: "These
structures are so staggering that people don't even think they exist still." In fact, there is a general archaeological consensus about the impressive civilization demonstrated by the moundbuilders in Cahokia and similar sites.

2. At 4:05 -- You claim: "The moundbuilders who built all kinds of structures." All evidence for the moundbuilders' architecture suggests that they built with sod packets and wood.

3. At 4:19 -- You mention carbon-dating but do not specify what was carbon-dated. You cannot carbon-date stone. Again at 6:00.

4. At 7:26 -- You mention Mayan theories. Since the recent deciphering of almost the full Mayan script, the astronomical preoccupation attributed to Mayan writings has been largely discredited. Most of the numbers found in the Mayan script are now believed to be dates of births,
coronations and wars.

5. At 9:15 -- You share newspaper clippings from the 19th century, including quotes from Abraham Lincoln, and claim they are evidence of giants. In fact, as one of our experts writes, "Skeletal hoaxes were common in the 19th century (e.g., Piltdown Man, the Cardiff Giant, and Barnum & Bailey Fiji mermaids [now at Harvard's Peabody Museum]). If (and this is a big if) the 8-foot skeleton is real, it could be a case of medical gigantism, but it is more likely a case of exaggeration."

6. With respect to the theories of gigantism, the TEDx fact checkers spoke to an expert who researched Middle Woodland and Mississippian skeletal collections at the Center for American Archaeology (CAA), based in Kampsville, IL, in 2007. The CAA is one of the largest repositories of excavated Woodland and Mississippian skeletal remains in the nation, and
their osteological collections are available for student and scholarly study. One expert stated "I can assure you that the archaeological Woodland and Mississippian populations were not giants. In some cases, one can observe a slight decrease in average height (a few centimeters) with the transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture. This is a trend that is observed in many cultures that undergo an agricultural transition, and is likely related to shorter nursing times and increased early childhood grain consumption (maximum height is highly correlated to childhood protein consumption, so a high reliance on grain during childhood tends to result in shorter stature)."

7. At 12:49 -- "Bones crumbled away because they weren't mummified." Skeletal preservation and mummification are unrelated processes. Plenty of skeletons survive in New England, and the disappearance of any and all skeletons that could
lend evidence to these claims today is highly suspect.

8. With respect to repeated claims that the Smithsonian is hiding or covering up evidence, the fact checkers also heard this, as well: "In 2007 I was a visiting scientist at the Smithsonian Museum Support Center, and while it is full of amazing and bizarre material (e.g., an entire herd of elephants that Teddy Roosevelt shot occupies one floor), there is no conspiracy to cover up or hide Native American giant skeletons or artifacts. Like most museums, the Smithsonian displays less than 1% of its collections at any given time, meaning that a lot of material spends decades (or sadly centuries) in its vaults awaiting exhibition. We can debate whether or not this is responsible stewardship (a debate that would also have to include a discussion of the chronic underfunding of public museums and the economics of public education), but to portray the
Smithsonian today as part of some sort of a conspiracy of `misinformation and corruption' to cover up Native American history by hiding giant moundbuilder skeletons excavated in the 19th century is ridiculous. Smithsonian physical anthropologists have published an impressive body of literature on the analysis of their collections."

I am writing to respond to the stated reasons why my TEDX talk was removed.

1. My assertion is that the staggering structures of the Mound Builders are largely unknown by the general public. I did not state that Archaeologists were unaware of this, I simply stated that the large majority of the population has no idea that they existed. I have presented to thousands of people and always ask if anyone has ever heard of the Mound Builders and their creations; no more than a handful has said yes. Despite the astounding
engineering feats and widespread construction of mind-boggling earthen pyramids and geometric forms in Ancient America this is barely discussed in high school or college education. The TED Board's assertion is a transparent attempt to portray me as lacking a basic understanding of Archaeological theory.

2. This statement is false. Actually, this helps prove my point that the works of the Mound Builders are poorly understood, even by the experts . The Mound Builders are well known for building with stone. There is absolutely an archaeological consensus for this. The Adena , Hopewell and Fort Ancient cultures built massive stone wall complexes, stone mounds and often stone temple chambers within earthen mounds. The Butler Co. site, Miami Co. site, Fort Hill, Spruce Hill and the Old Stone Fort at Tennessee are a few of the well known and universally accepted stone works of Ancient America. Spruce Hill was a
140 acre hilltop with a two and a quarter mile-long stone wall around the perimeter. A map of the site is listed in the Smithsonian's 12th annual ethnology report by the respected Cyrus Thomas who also mapped the stone fort at Flint ridge. All this info can be seen in Norman Mueller's Glenford Stone Fort and other Stone Constructions in Ohio and Beyond. From the History of Perry County Ohio 1902 is a description of the Adena stone hilltop enclosure and stone burial mound. "Archeologists from all over the land have visited here and the consensus of opinion is that the Glenford site is one of the most wonderful of fortifications....it is a fraction over 27 acres. It is made entirely of stone." Also from Gerard Fowke's Antiquities of MO. 1902 pg 65, "So far as the ability to work in stone is concerned, some stone chambers which exist in Pike County MO. have been mentioned as examples of the skill of the Mound Builders in this respect." Fowkes work is
widely known and published in Smithsonian Ethnology Reports. There is complete consensus within mainstream archaeology that the Mound Builders built many structures of stone. Looks like you might have to vet your experts a little better.

3. To state to me that you cannot carbon date stone is insulting , clearly only organic material such as charcoal and bone fragments can be carbon dated. I in fact read a report in my talk from highly respected and award winning Geochrom labs in Massachusetts about the Mystery Hill site in New Hampshire. May 30th 1966 sample # GX-1608 submitted by Robert Stone as given by Archaeologist Jim Whitall. Harold W. Kruger technical director of Geochron states "you have found something very interesting from this site with a rather old date of 2995 B.P." Kruger states that there is a quite an adequate amount of material for dating. Date was 2995 B.P. +/- 180 C-14 years.
Whitall also excavated carbon remains from the Putney VT. stone chamber that yielded a date of 492 A.D. and excavated one of the oldest burial mound sites in the country, the Morrill Point site in Salisbury Ma. He found three human skeletons and artifacts as well as conclusively proving a stone wall at the site through carbon dating of layers of organic material is at least 900 years old. The Maritime Archaic site at Morrill Point proved to be 7500 years old and before Mr. Whitall passed away he was joined by Dr. Bruce Bourque and the highly regarded Dr. William Fitzhugh of the Smithsonian to make sure he received credit for his amazing discovery. The L'Anse Amour stone burial mound in Labrador was expertly dated and universally recognized as being built 7500 years ago proving that stonework in the northeast goes back at least this far. All this information is readily available for anyone to see. I know a story about a bit of pseudoscience. How about
the Clovis Barrier, the crowning achievement of Archaeology, rammed down our throat for 70 years now proven incontrovertibly false. If you questioned this for years you were considered a crank and a fool. Do you think a possible revaluation of other theories that are riddled with unexplained anomalies may happen soon. The only thing I ask for a fair and open discussion of anomalies but the system always demonizes the one who points these out, engages in personal attacks and a misdirection away from the evidence. Does anyone have Galileo's email address?

4. I stated that some researchers believe that the mound builder culture that started in Watson Brake La. in roughly 3400 B.C. may have been influenced by contact with societies in the Yucatan or actual migrations northward by members of that civilization. In fact there is conclusive proof of trade routes covering thousands of miles in Ancient America as
evidence from artifact finds at Hopewell sites in Illinois. Mississippian era earthen pyramid temple building clearly resembles Mesoamerican stone pyramids and huge plazas such as the one at Cahokia make it perfectly reasonable to assume a possible, more southerly influence at some time. The geometry and astronomical orientations of the Mound Builders are widely accepted- see Bradley Leper the curator of Archaeology at the Ohio Historical Societies work and Lively and Horn's research on the Newark Octagon.

5. I, along with many other researchers who have written books on this matter have collected thousands of accounts in town histories, NYT articles, the Smithsonian's Ethnology reports, Scientific American and American Antiquarian of giant skeletal remains being discovered. Many of these with anatomic anomalies such as double rows of teeth. This occurs not just in 1840 but through decades of time
and across thousands of miles. The discoveries continued throughout the 1920's, 30's, 40's and into the 60's. Don Dragoo was directly affiliated with the Carnegie museum of Natural History from the years 1952-1977. He is considered the last of the great Adena scholars and by the end of his career was named curator of the Carnegie's Section of Anthropology.

The following is a quote from his Mounds for the Dead. "Two outstanding traits have been noted repeatedly for this group. One is the protruding and massive chin often with prominent bilateral protrusions. (Webb and Snow, 1959 pg. 37). The second is the large size of many of the males and some of the females. A male of six feet was common and some individuals approaching seven feet have been found. Not only were these Adena people tall but the massiveness of the bones indicates powerfully built individuals. The head was generally big with a large
cranial capacity." Warren K. Morehead the " Dean of American Archaeology" unearthed giant skeletons in Illinois, Connecticut and Pennsylvania. I showed accounts of all three in my presentation. At Tioga Point Pennsylvania. he uncovered 68 skeletons averaging over 7 feet with many much larger, specimens were sent to the American Investigating Museum where they were later reported stolen. Ralph Glidden working for the Heye Foundation unearthed 3,781 skeletons averaging 7 feet with the largest 9 foot 2 inches on Catalina Island CA. I have numerous pictures of these finds including a picture from the Santa Barbara museum in 1959 of these giant skeleton finds. This is not a case of gigantism, countless accounts speak of dozens of skeletons being uncovered, often with bizarre anatomic anomalies.

Alex Hrdlicka, the first head of the Smithsonian Division of Anthropology starting in 1903 closed the door on
the matter of giant skeletal finds being reported. He guided the Smithsonian to attack and marginalize all this information but he could not erase the Smithsonian's own Ethnology reports so he claimed that "giants are no more" and that an inability to measure correctly and understand human anatomy properly was the reason why these things were previously reported. Hrdlicka believed in Pre-Nazi eugenics, thought no civilization existed in America before 4000 years ago and zealously attacked and intimidated anyone who challenged these ideas- calling Louis Leaky a heretic to his face and destroying the career of Warren K. Morehead. Hrdlicka is quoted in the Science News Letter v13 #353 1928 p21 as claiming "the greatest danger before the American people is the blending of the Negro tenth of the population into the superior blood of the white race." In 1937 he published findings in his Journal of Physical Anthropology to "prove that the negro race is
phylogenetically a closer approach to primitive man than the white race." And just for good measure in 1927 endorsed findings comparing African babies with young apes.

Before Hrdlicka's reign there were no denials of giant skeleton finds. Hrdlicka along with many of his white supremacist colleagues at the Institution purged new evidence and marginalized and intimidated all who stood in the way of portraying the races of Ancient America as anything other than unsophisticated. Through cranial measurement Hrdlicka concluded that Native Americans along with African Americans were inferior to the white race. As geologist Kirk Bryan told his students during the reign of Hrdrickla "if you ever find evidence of human life in a context which is ancient, bury it carefully but do not forget about it."(from The First American: A study of North American Archaeology 1971.) Anthropologists and Archaeologists do not
recognize this phenomena, they are reading texts and scientific journals that have been censored of these accounts. Professionals read over and over again about normal sized accounts and rightfully think the whole thing is preposterous. I never claimed that all the Mound Builders were giants or that they were the architects of the mounds. I am simply stating that there were thousands of giant skeletal remains uncovered in Ancient America oftentimes in the burial mounds such as the Grave Creek mound in WV. From the Charleston Daily Mail October 22nd 1922, "Archaeologists investigating the mound dug out a skeleton of a female. The skeleton was 7 foot 4 inches tall and the jawbone would easily fit over the face of a man weighing 160 pounds. An 8 foot male skeleton was also found." Once again, this strange anatomic anomaly of a massive jawbone like I found throughout the town histories of New England.

6 I
believe response 5 also answers 6, I will say however you mention redditskeptic as a source of your investigation. The site specializes in a series of ad hominem attacks, bad faith arguments, invisible battles with straw men and personal insults. Essentially an endless stream of infantile drivel, it is not a place for objective and open-minded evaluation of evidence by anyone's standards. They continually assail Deepak Chopra for scientifically unproven theories such as the reality of "Chakras". By your new standards I suppose you will have to take down his talks also, he certainly endorses theories determined pseudoscientific by professionals.

7 Bones crumbling to dust is something to be found over and over again in the historical literature including the Smithsonian's own Ethnology reports. I was reaching for words such as mummification or preservation trying to theorize why some bones crumbled to dust
and others didn't. I was just trying to share that many remains were measured, examined often determined to have strange anatomic anomalies before they crumbled to dust, some but by no means all.

8 Did the expert who visited the Smithsonian's museums support center happen to make it over to the David H. Koch's Hall of Human Origins permanent installation, where an interactive game tells us that in the future humans may adapt to climate change by "building underground cities, growing short compact bodies with curved spines to better move around in tight spaces." I am not talking about mermaids and Barnum and Bailey hoaxes, were there over one hundred mermaid accounts from leading scientists of the time published in the New York Times? I am talking about thousands of accounts from the likes of Moorehead, Webb, Dragoo, Norris, other Anthropologists, Archaeologists, Professors, Doctors, Chief Justices and
ordinary citizens. They were reporting what they saw before their own eyes not a discussion of their religious and political beliefs. How do you tell someone who puts a skull over their head, fits a jawbone over their face or reports double rows of teeth that they don't understand human anatomy?

Your reasons for pulling my video are an attempt to portray me as an unsophisticated amateur that was taken in by some grand hoax. What I did was read through a series of town history, Smithsonian Ethnology and NYT reports. I was not advocating a tricky, dangerous and unproven health cure but just trying to share interesting information from the leading and most respected Scientific Journals and sources of the time. Any disinterested teenager can assemble a hundred of these accounts over a weekend with the help of Google books. I have a large number of accounts that state that the Smithsonian in fact received
many of these giant skeletal remains. So, why again was my video taken down? The bottom line is that I guess this is not an idea worth sharing because it reveals corruption and cover-ups at an institution whose misguided actions are open for anyone to see with a little historical detective work. Not wanting to speak with me or allow me to debate these reasons before removing the video is very troubling. I would hope you would do me the professional courtesy of whenever or wherever you list the reasons my talk was taken down you also allow people to see my response. "When a well packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and it's speaker a raving lunatic." Dresden James.

Hello all, I would recommend people should study the period in which Hrdlicka managed the Smithsonian Collection, and for many years refused any remains or

Message 3 of 10
, Dec 20, 2012

0 Attachment

Hello all,

I would recommend people should study the period in which Hrdlicka managed the Smithsonian Collection, and for many years refused any remains or evidence that contradicted his paradigm. Many have written about this period and I believe that much of the evidence on line goes back to first hand accounts by 1600's era settlers in the colonies meeting the Susquehanna. Who were described as carrying 9 foot bows. Their woman were talll and stately as well and some of the men had the lower leg or calve area as large or larger than most peoples upper legs.

In the diary of Major Long who surveyed the Mississippi to determine locations of fort locations that might be built wrote about an 8 foot skeleton in Prairie du Chien in Wisconsin. The lower leg bone from a grave uncovered while a foundation was being dug for the home of Mr. Dubois was a good six inches longer than his lower leg when he kneeled down and it was measured from the ground to his knee. These folks got around as this is more than thousand miles west of the Susquehanna country. There is the account of the Osage people that were described by Lewis and Clark and who sent a group of them to meet President Jefferson in Washington. It was remarked how tall and well built they were.

Anyone who does a modicum of research will uncover these early accounts and there are enough of them to write a book, and I know a couple in the works.

If our interests span conventional, or mainstream archeology, to diffusion, and 18,000 year old evidence of European lithic technology on the east coast, we can accept here the thoughts of Mr. Vieira.

ted sojka

PS For those interested, there is a radio show online from WBAI in New York where Ross Hamilton will be interviewed on Tiokasin's Indigenous Radio program. I think it airs next Monday. I assume they are archive so you can hear it when you want to. They will discuss the giant information he has collected.

On Dec 20, 2012, at 1:06 PM, Larry Hancock wrote:

I saw Vieira's video and sent the link to a couple of NEARA members who saw the same thing I did: practically all of his photographs are "borrowed" from the internet. All his information is secondary. The connection of giant skeletons to the stone chambers has no evidence.--- On Thu, 12/20/12, Susan <beldingenglish@...> wrote:

(Cal, i was stirred deeply by your last letter...recalled how lucky i was to have et you at a conference in Provo or Salt Lake City maybe almost two decades ago)

Ancient Waterways friends. Happy Holidays!

Minnesota researcher Larry Furo sent an update today to another group I have great interest in. It is a lengthy, but sincere, well-written letter and the latest word from Ashfield, Massachuetts stonemason, James Vieira who has been mentioned at AWS before by some of you, though i think his last name at our site was spelled incorrectly. At least two members know him personally and have expressed great respect for him. Again, a broad subject and lengthy letter from him. But I and many here and diffusionists as well as many academics as well have long held much interest and may find it well worth stepping further into the diligent efforts of James Vierira.

First, a somewhat random link about him first (i fell on blue ice covered with right inches of snow in a blizzard this AM trying to pick up a Christmas tree before my children from three states come north for our weekend holiday celebration. I hurt my neck something fierce, waived off an ambulance and cannot linger long here).

Next, i hope will follow his most recent public letter he posted at his Facebook page under this title: Stone Builders, Mound Builders and the Giants of Ancient America | Jim Vieira

Scanned, for those not signed into FB, from James E. Vieira, his response to recent censorship, etc.:

"After 120,000 views, the #1 most watched tedx video in the world during the month it was up, my talk has been removed. I am posting the resons given and my response. A long but interesting read about how censorship can happen. Thanks Jim

At 2:03 -- You claim: "These structures are so staggering that people don't even think they exist still." In fact, there is a general archaeological consensus about the impressive civilization demonstrated by the moundbuilders in Cahokia and similar sites.

2. At 4:05 -- You claim: "The moundbuilders who built all kinds of structures." All evidence for the moundbuilders' architecture suggests that they built with sod packets and wood.

3. At 4:19 -- You mention carbon-dating but do not specify what was carbon-dated. You cannot carbon-date stone. Again at 6:00.

4. At 7:26 -- You mention Mayan theories. Since the recent deciphering of almost the full Mayan script, the astronomical preoccupation attributed to Mayan writings has been largely discredited. Most of the numbers found in the Mayan script are now believed to be dates of births, coronations and wars.

5. At 9:15 -- You share newspaper clippings from the 19th century, including quotes from Abraham Lincoln, and claim they are evidence of giants. In fact, as one of our experts writes, "Skeletal hoaxes were common in the 19th century (e.g., Piltdown Man, the Cardiff Giant, and Barnum & Bailey Fiji mermaids [now at Harvard's Peabody Museum]). If (and this is a big if) the 8-foot skeleton is real, it could be a case of medical gigantism, but it is more likely a case of exaggeration."

6. With respect to the theories of gigantism, the TEDx fact checkers spoke to an expert who researched Middle Woodland and Mississippian skeletal collections at the Center for American Archaeology (CAA), based in Kampsville, IL, in 2007. The CAA is one of the largest repositories of excavated Woodland and Mississippian skeletal remains in the nation, and their osteological collections are available for student and scholarly study. One expert stated "I can assure you that the archaeological Woodland and Mississippian populations were not giants. In some cases, one can observe a slight decrease in average height (a few centimeters) with the transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture. This is a trend that is observed in many cultures that undergo an agricultural transition, and is likely related to shorter nursing times and increased early childhood grain consumption (maximum height is highly correlated to childhood protein consumption, so a high reliance on grain during childhood tends to result in shorter stature)."

7. At 12:49 -- "Bones crumbled away because they weren't mummified." Skeletal preservation and mummification are unrelated processes. Plenty of skeletons survive in New England, and the disappearance of any and all skeletons that could lend evidence to these claims today is highly suspect.

8. With respect to repeated claims that the Smithsonian is hiding or covering up evidence, the fact checkers also heard this, as well: "In 2007 I was a visiting scientist at the Smithsonian Museum Support Center, and while it is full of amazing and bizarre material (e.g., an entire herd of elephants that Teddy Roosevelt shot occupies one floor), there is no conspiracy to cover up or hide Native American giant skeletons or artifacts. Like most museums, the Smithsonian displays less than 1% of its collections at any given time, meaning that a lot of material spends decades (or sadly centuries) in its vaults awaiting exhibition. We can debate whether or not this is responsible stewardship (a debate that would also have to include a discussion of the chronic underfunding of public museums and the economics of public education), but to portray the Smithsonian today as part of some sort of a conspiracy of `misinformation and corruption' to cover up Native American history by hiding giant moundbuilder skeletons excavated in the 19th century is ridiculous. Smithsonian physical anthropologists have published an impressive body of literature on the analysis of their collections."

I am writing to respond to the stated reasons why my TEDX talk was removed.

1. My assertion is that the staggering structures of the Mound Builders are largely unknown by the general public. I did not state that Archaeologists were unaware of this, I simply stated that the large majority of the population has no idea that they existed. I have presented to thousands of people and always ask if anyone has ever heard of the Mound Builders and their creations; no more than a handful has said yes. Despite the astounding engineering feats and widespread construction of mind-boggling earthen pyramids and geometric forms in Ancient America this is barely discussed in high school or college education. The TED Board's assertion is a transparent attempt to portray me as lacking a basic understanding of Archaeological theory.

2. This statement is false. Actually, this helps prove my point that the works of the Mound Builders are poorly understood, even by the experts . The Mound Builders are well known for building with stone. There is absolutely an archaeological consensus for this. The Adena , Hopewell and Fort Ancient cultures built massive stone wall complexes, stone mounds and often stone temple chambers within earthen mounds. The Butler Co. site, Miami Co. site, Fort Hill, Spruce Hill and the Old Stone Fort at Tennessee are a few of the well known and universally accepted stone works of Ancient America. Spruce Hill was a 140 acre hilltop with a two and a quarter mile-long stone wall around the perimeter. A map of the site is listed in the Smithsonian's 12th annual ethnology report by the respected Cyrus Thomas who also mapped the stone fort at Flint ridge. All this info can be seen in Norman Mueller's Glenford Stone Fort and other Stone Constructions in Ohio and Beyond. From the History of Perry County Ohio 1902 is a description of the Adena stone hilltop enclosure and stone burial mound. "Archeologists from all over the land have visited here and the consensus of opinion is that the Glenford site is one of the most wonderful of fortifications....it is a fraction over 27 acres. It is made entirely of stone." Also from Gerard Fowke's Antiquities of MO. 1902 pg 65, "So far as the ability to work in stone is concerned, some stone chambers which exist in Pike County MO. have been mentioned as examples of the skill of the Mound Builders in this respect." Fowkes work is widely known and published in Smithsonian Ethnology Reports. There is complete consensus within mainstream archaeology that the Mound Builders built many structures of stone. Looks like you might have to vet your experts a little better.

3. To state to me that you cannot carbon date stone is insulting , clearly only organic material such as charcoal and bone fragments can be carbon dated. I in fact read a report in my talk from highly respected and award winning Geochrom labs in Massachusetts about the Mystery Hill site in New Hampshire. May 30th 1966 sample # GX-1608 submitted by Robert Stone as given by Archaeologist Jim Whitall. Harold W. Kruger technical director of Geochron states "you have found something very interesting from this site with a rather old date of 2995 B.P." Kruger states that there is a quite an adequate amount of material for dating. Date was 2995 B.P. +/- 180 C-14 years. Whitall also excavated carbon remains from the Putney VT. stone chamber that yielded a date of 492 A.D. and excavated one of the oldest burial mound sites in the country, the Morrill Point site in Salisbury Ma. He found three human skeletons and artifacts as well as conclusively proving a stone wall at the site through carbon dating of layers of organic material is at least 900 years old. The Maritime Archaic site at Morrill Point proved to be 7500 years old and before Mr. Whitall passed away he was joined by Dr. Bruce Bourque and the highly regarded Dr. William Fitzhugh of the Smithsonian to make sure he received credit for his amazing discovery. The L'Anse Amour stone burial mound in Labrador was expertly dated and universally recognized as being built 7500 years ago proving that stonework in the northeast goes back at least this far. All this information is readily available for anyone to see. I know a story about a bit of pseudoscience. How about the Clovis Barrier, the crowning achievement of Archaeology, rammed down our throat for 70 years now proven incontrovertibly false. If you questioned this for years you were considered a crank and a fool. Do you think a possible revaluation of other theories that are riddled with unexplained anomalies may happen soon. The only thing I ask for a fair and open discussion of anomalies but the system always demonizes the one who points these out, engages in personal attacks and a misdirection away from the evidence. Does anyone have Galileo's email address?

4. I stated that some researchers believe that the mound builder culture that started in Watson Brake La. in roughly 3400 B.C. may have been influenced by contact with societies in the Yucatan or actual migrations northward by members of that civilization. In fact there is conclusive proof of trade routes covering thousands of miles in Ancient America as evidence from artifact finds at Hopewell sites in Illinois. Mississippian era earthen pyramid temple building clearly resembles Mesoamerican stone pyramids and huge plazas such as the one at Cahokia make it perfectly reasonable to assume a possible, more southerly influence at some time. The geometry and astronomical orientations of the Mound Builders are widely accepted- see Bradley Leper the curator of Archaeology at the Ohio Historical Societies work and Lively and Horn's research on the Newark Octagon.

5. I, along with many other researchers who have written books on this matter have collected thousands of accounts in town histories, NYT articles, the Smithsonian's Ethnology reports, Scientific American and American Antiquarian of giant skeletal remains being discovered. Many of these with anatomic anomalies such as double rows of teeth. This occurs not just in 1840 but through decades of time and across thousands of miles. The discoveries continued throughout the 1920's, 30's, 40's and into the 60's. Don Dragoo was directly affiliated with the Carnegie museum of Natural History from the years 1952-1977. He is considered the last of the great Adena scholars and by the end of his career was named curator of the Carnegie's Section of Anthropology.

The following is a quote from his Mounds for the Dead. "Two outstanding traits have been noted repeatedly for this group. One is the protruding and massive chin often with prominent bilateral protrusions. (Webb and Snow, 1959 pg. 37). The second is the large size of many of the males and some of the females. A male of six feet was common and some individuals approaching seven feet have been found. Not only were these Adena people tall but the massiveness of the bones indicates powerfully built individuals. The head was generally big with a large cranial capacity." Warren K. Morehead the " Dean of American Archaeology" unearthed giant skeletons in Illinois, Connecticut and Pennsylvania. I showed accounts of all three in my presentation. At Tioga Point Pennsylvania. he uncovered 68 skeletons averaging over 7 feet with many much larger, specimens were sent to the American Investigating Museum where they were later reported stolen. Ralph Glidden working for the Heye Foundation unearthed 3,781 skeletons averaging 7 feet with the largest 9 foot 2 inches on Catalina Island CA. I have numerous pictures of these finds including a picture from the Santa Barbara museum in 1959 of these giant skeleton finds. This is not a case of gigantism, countless accounts speak of dozens of skeletons being uncovered, often with bizarre anatomic anomalies.

Alex Hrdlicka, the first head of the Smithsonian Division of Anthropology starting in 1903 closed the door on the matter of giant skeletal finds being reported. He guided the Smithsonian to attack and marginalize all this information but he could not erase the Smithsonian's own Ethnology reports so he claimed that "giants are no more" and that an inability to measure correctly and understand human anatomy properly was the reason why these things were previously reported. Hrdlicka believed in Pre-Nazi eugenics, thought no civilization existed in America before 4000 years ago and zealously attacked and intimidated anyone who challenged these ideas- calling Louis Leaky a heretic to his face and destroying the career of Warren K. Morehead. Hrdlicka is quoted in the Science News Letter v13 #353 1928 p21 as claiming "the greatest danger before the American people is the blending of the Negro tenth of the population into the superior blood of the white race." In 1937 he published findings in his Journal of Physical Anthropology to "prove that the negro race is phylogenetically a closer approach to primitive man than the white race." And just for good measure in 1927 endorsed findings comparing African babies with young apes.

Before Hrdlicka's reign there were no denials of giant skeleton finds. Hrdlicka along with many of his white supremacist colleagues at the Institution purged new evidence and marginalized and intimidated all who stood in the way of portraying the races of Ancient America as anything other than unsophisticated. Through cranial measurement Hrdlicka concluded that Native Americans along with African Americans were inferior to the white race. As geologist Kirk Bryan told his students during the reign of Hrdrickla "if you ever find evidence of human life in a context which is ancient, bury it carefully but do not forget about it."(from The First American: A study of North American Archaeology 1971.) Anthropologists and Archaeologists do not recognize this phenomena, they are reading texts and scientific journals that have been censored of these accounts. Professionals read over and over again about normal sized accounts and rightfully think the whole thing is preposterous. I never claimed that all the Mound Builders were giants or that they were the architects of the mounds. I am simply stating that there were thousands of giant skeletal remains uncovered in Ancient America oftentimes in the burial mounds such as the Grave Creek mound in WV. From the Charleston Daily Mail October 22nd 1922, "Archaeologists investigating the mound dug out a skeleton of a female. The skeleton was 7 foot 4 inches tall and the jawbone would easily fit over the face of a man weighing 160 pounds. An 8 foot male skeleton was also found." Once again, this strange anatomic anomaly of a massive jawbone like I found throughout the town histories of New England.

6 I believe response 5 also answers 6, I will say however you mention redditskeptic as a source of your investigation. The site specializes in a series of ad hominem attacks, bad faith arguments, invisible battles with straw men and personal insults. Essentially an endless stream of infantile drivel, it is not a place for objective and open-minded evaluation of evidence by anyone's standards. They continually assail Deepak Chopra for scientifically unproven theories such as the reality of "Chakras". By your new standards I suppose you will have to take down his talks also, he certainly endorses theories determined pseudoscientific by professionals.

7 Bones crumbling to dust is something to be found over and over again in the historical literature including the Smithsonian's own Ethnology reports. I was reaching for words such as mummification or preservation trying to theorize why some bones crumbled to dust and others didn't. I was just trying to share that many remains were measured, examined often determined to have strange anatomic anomalies before they crumbled to dust, some but by no means all.

8 Did the expert who visited the Smithsonian's museums support center happen to make it over to the David H. Koch's Hall of Human Origins permanent installation, where an interactive game tells us that in the future humans may adapt to climate change by "building underground cities, growing short compact bodies with curved spines to better move around in tight spaces." I am not talking about mermaids and Barnum and Bailey hoaxes, were there over one hundred mermaid accounts from leading scientists of the time published in the New York Times? I am talking about thousands of accounts from the likes of Moorehead, Webb, Dragoo, Norris, other Anthropologists, Archaeologists, Professors, Doctors, Chief Justices and ordinary citizens. They were reporting what they saw before their own eyes not a discussion of their religious and political beliefs. How do you tell someone who puts a skull over their head, fits a jawbone over their face or reports double rows of teeth that they don't understand human anatomy?

Your reasons for pulling my video are an attempt to portray me as an unsophisticated amateur that was taken in by some grand hoax. What I did was read through a series of town history, Smithsonian Ethnology and NYT reports. I was not advocating a tricky, dangerous and unproven health cure but just trying to share interesting information from the leading and most respected Scientific Journals and sources of the time. Any disinterested teenager can assemble a hundred of these accounts over a weekend with the help of Google books. I have a large number of accounts that state that the Smithsonian in fact received many of these giant skeletal remains. So, why again was my video taken down? The bottom line is that I guess this is not an idea worth sharing because it reveals corruption and cover-ups at an institution whose misguided actions are open for anyone to see with a little historical detective work. Not wanting to speak with me or allow me to debate these reasons before removing the video is very troubling. I would hope you would do me the professional courtesy of whenever or wherever you list the reasons my talk was taken down you also allow people to see my response. "When a well packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and it's speaker a raving lunatic." Dresden James.

Susan - Steve Garcia here. I don t post comments here very often at all, because I don t have much to contribute. But there is at least one issue Vierira

Message 4 of 10
, Dec 21, 2012

0 Attachment

Susan -

Steve Garcia here. I don't post comments here very often at all, because I don't have much to contribute. But there is at least one issue Vierira addresses that I will contend with. I think Vierira is pulling off a speculative hipshooting on the issue of the giants.

Ed Grondine's book, "Man and Impact in the Americas" discusses the Indian accounts of the giants and giant skeletons found by settlers. They are sober accounts, with very little if any P.T. Barnum in any of them. Vierira is simply doing the arky 'sweep it under the carpet' hoping everyone will bow to his supposed expertise. But he shows he doesn't even know what he is talking about. Keep your eye on the pea. Vierira never talks about the giants in the areas where giants really did have remains found - with measurements in some cases.

Vierira:

<blockquote>You share newspaper clippings from the 19th century, including quotes from Abraham Lincoln, and claim they are evidence of giants. In fact, as one of our experts writes, "Skeletal hoaxes were common in the 19th century (e.g., Piltdown Man, the Cardiff Giant, and Barnum & Bailey Fiji mermaids [now at Harvard's Peabody Museum]). If (and this is a big if) the 8-foot skeleton is real, it could be a case of medical gigantism, but it is more likely a case of exaggeration."6. With respect to the theories of gigantism, the TEDx fact checkers spoke to an expert who researched Middle Woodland and Mississippian skeletal collections at the Center for American Archaeology (CAA), based in Kampsville, IL, in 2007. The CAA is one of the largest repositories of excavated Woodland and Mississippian skeletal remains in the nation, and their osteological collections are available for student and scholarly study. One expert stated "I can assure you that the archaeological Woodland and Mississippian populations were not giants. In some cases, one can observe a slight decrease in average height (a few centimeters) with the transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture. This is a trend that is observed in many cultures that undergo an agricultural transition, and is likely related to shorter nursing times and increased early childhood grain consumption (maximum height is highly correlated to childhood protein consumption, so a high reliance on grain during childhood tends to result in shorter stature)."</blockquote>

The first thing Vierira does is discount all the news accounts as "19th century" as if that makes them written by a bunch of country bumpkins who wouldn't know a large skeleton from a tree.

Then he makes another sweeping statement piling all the accounts into one pile - with P.T. Barnum (show biz and much later in the 19th century) and Piltdown Man (England). "Skeletal hoaxes were common in the 19th century" - what is wrong with this? It is a wave-of-the-hand generality that means nothing. My money says he did not put ONE second's effort into researching "the 19th century" (a generality in itself) and its scams - and then broadly includes the entire world in his entire 19th century. This is a common modern hubris in science - that people - even scientists - in earlier times were not as capable as modern people to observe evidence clearly, thus that earlier evidence should be discounted. By this kind (Vierira) of "scientific review" all the work of Maxwell, Faraday, Davy, Watt and thousands of other scientists can be included in the doubtful "19th century" scams. By associating these in his ill-informed under-the-rug move, he hopes to convince people that all 19th century evidence is unreliable - based on nothing more than his say so. If I am not mistaken, Vierira never looked at ONE of the newspaper accounts himself - which is a scientific strategy but a scientific scam, which goes, "I am the authority, so listen to everything I myself say and ignore anything I tell you to ignore." They do this without doing ONE bit of actual research on the specific subject.

He even admits he has not looked at the evidence when he says, "If (and this is a big if) the 8-foot skeleton is real." Then he really puolls a boner, when he says, "it could be a case of medical gigantism." Why a boner? Because he is frankly admitting he is speculating (using the word "could"). He follow up that speculation with another: "but it is more likely a case of exaggeration." "More likely" means that he again did not even look at the evidence, but is pulling this out of you-know-where - and expecting you the reader to just sit down, listen and shut up.

In the following I will leave out the numerous other references to skeletons or skulls of enormous stature or size. I accept the word of the many common people from many locations far afield of each other, and with no axe to grind, that when they say a skeleton is enormous or gigantic, they will be comparing the remains with their general experience and would not mention extraordinary size unless it was remarkable. :

From Ed's book (p 117) "[]...the skeletons of eight persons... measuring eight feet from head to toe. . . the leg bone extended six inches above his knee." I will ask what some member of the Warren Commission asked about the autopsy of JFK: "Do you accept that the person was capable of reading the numbers on a ruler"? (footnote available on request)

(p 124) "[Ashtabula, OH] ...This land at one time was owned by Mr. Peleg Sweet, who was a man of large size and full features; and it is narrated that at one time he, in digging, came upon a skull and jaw which were of such size that the skull would cover his head, and the jw could be easily slipped over his face, as though the head of the giant were enveloping his..."

(p 127) "[Erie, PA] ...Amongst the skeletons was one of a giant, side by side with a smaller one, probably his wife. The arm and legs of this [N]ative American Goliath were about one-half longer than those of the tallest man among the laborers; the skull was immensely large' the lower jawbone easily slipped over the face and whiskers of a full faced man..."

Ed has such accounts - footnoted - in several of his chapters, of what he calls the Copper Trading Giants, because they play a part over some time period, until they are killed off by other tribes.

I recommend the book "Man and Impact in the Americas" both as good reading and as a reference. It is only available in soft cover, and only from Ed himself. See his listing at cosmictusk.com for how to get a copy.

Steve Garcia

--- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wrote:>> (Cal, i was stirred deeply by your last letter...recalled how lucky i> was to have et you at a conference in Provo or Salt Lake City maybe> almost two decades ago)> Ancient Waterways friends. Happy Holidays!> Minnesota researcher Larry Furo sent an update today to another group I> have great interest in. It is a lengthy, but sincere, well-written> letter and the latest word from Ashfield, Massachuetts stonemason, James> Vieira who has been mentioned at AWS before by some of you, though i> think his last name at our site was spelled incorrectly. At least two> members know him personally and have expressed great respect for him. > Again, a broad subject and lengthy letter from him. But I and many here> and diffusionists as well as many academics as well have long held much> interest and may find it well worth stepping further into the diligent> efforts of James Vierira.> First, a somewhat random link about him first (i fell on blue ice> covered with right inches of snow in a blizzard this AM trying to pick> up a Christmas tree before my children from three states come north for> our weekend holiday celebration. I hurt my neck something fierce,> waived off an ambulance and cannot linger long here). Next, i hope will> follow his most recent public letter he posted at his Facebook page> under this title: Stone Builders, Mound Builders and the Giants of> Ancient America | Jim Vieira> http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2012/12/stone-builders-mound-builde\> rs-and-the-giants-of-ancient-america-jim-vieira-2506330.html> > ers-and-the-giants-of-ancient-america-jim-vieira-2506330.html>> Scanned, for those not signed into FB, from James E. Vieira, his> response to recent censorship, etc.:> "After 120,000 views, the #1 most watched tedx video in the world during> the month it was up, my talk has been removed. I am posting the resons> given and my response. A long but interesting read about how censorship> can happen. Thanks JimAt 2:03 -- You claim: "These structures are so> staggering that people don't even think they exist still." In> fact, there is a general archaeological consensus about the impressive> civilization demonstrated by the moundbuilders in Cahokia and similar> sites.2. At 4:05 -- You claim: "The moundbuilders who built all> kinds of structures." All evidence for the moundbuilders'> architecture suggests that they built with sod packets and wood.3. At> 4:19 -- You mention carbon-dating but do not specify what was> carbon-dated. You cannot carbon-date stone. Again at 6:00.4. At 7:26 --> You mention Mayan theories. Since the recent deciphering of almost the> full Mayan script, the astronomical preoccupation attributed to Mayan> writings has been largely discredited. Most of the numbers found in the> Mayan script are now believed to be dates of births, coronations and> wars.5. At 9:15 -- You share newspaper clippings from the 19th century,> including quotes from Abraham Lincoln, and claim they are evidence of> giants. In fact, as one of our experts writes, "Skeletal hoaxes were> common in the 19th century (e.g., Piltdown Man, the Cardiff Giant, and> Barnum & Bailey Fiji mermaids [now at Harvard's Peabody Museum]). If> (and this is a big if) the 8-foot skeleton is real, it could be a case> of medical gigantism, but it is more likely a case of exaggeration."6.> With respect to the theories of gigantism, the TEDx fact checkers spoke> to an expert who researched Middle Woodland and Mississippian skeletal> collections at the Center for American Archaeology (CAA), based in> Kampsville, IL, in 2007. The CAA is one of the largest repositories of> excavated Woodland and Mississippian skeletal remains in the nation, and> their osteological collections are available for student and scholarly> study. One expert stated "I can assure you that the archaeological> Woodland and Mississippian populations were not giants. In some cases,> one can observe a slight decrease in average height (a few centimeters)> with the transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture. This is a> trend that is observed in many cultures that undergo an agricultural> transition, and is likely related to shorter nursing times and increased> early childhood grain consumption (maximum height is highly correlated> to childhood protein consumption, so a high reliance on grain during> childhood tends to result in shorter stature)."7. At 12:49 -- "Bones> crumbled away because they weren't mummified." Skeletal> preservation and mummification are unrelated processes. Plenty of> skeletons survive in New England, and the disappearance of any and all> skeletons that could lend evidence to these claims today is highly> suspect.8. With respect to repeated claims that the Smithsonian is> hiding or covering up evidence, the fact checkers also heard this, as> well: "In 2007 I was a visiting scientist at the Smithsonian Museum> Support Center, and while it is full of amazing and bizarre material> (e.g., an entire herd of elephants that Teddy Roosevelt shot occupies> one floor), there is no conspiracy to cover up or hide Native American> giant skeletons or artifacts. Like most museums, the Smithsonian> displays less than 1% of its collections at any given time, meaning that> a lot of material spends decades (or sadly centuries) in its vaults> awaiting exhibition. We can debate whether or not this is responsible> stewardship (a debate that would also have to include a discussion of> the chronic underfunding of public museums and the economics of public> education), but to portray the Smithsonian today as part of some sort of> a conspiracy of `misinformation and corruption' to cover up> Native American history by hiding giant moundbuilder skeletons excavated> in the 19th century is ridiculous. Smithsonian physical anthropologists> have published an impressive body of literature on the analysis of their> collections."I am writing to respond to the stated reasons why my TEDX> talk was removed. 1. My assertion is that the staggering structures of> the Mound Builders are largely unknown by the general public. I did not> state that Archaeologists were unaware of this, I simply stated that the> large majority of the population has no idea that they existed. I have> presented to thousands of people and always ask if anyone has ever heard> of the Mound Builders and their creations; no more than a handful has> said yes. Despite the astounding engineering feats and widespread> construction of mind-boggling earthen pyramids and geometric forms in> Ancient America this is barely discussed in high school or college> education. The TED Board's assertion is a transparent attempt to portray> me as lacking a basic understanding of Archaeological theory.2. This> statement is false. Actually, this helps prove my point that the works> of the Mound Builders are poorly understood, even by the experts . The> Mound Builders are well known for building with stone. There is> absolutely an archaeological consensus for this. The Adena , Hopewell> and Fort Ancient cultures built massive stone wall complexes, stone> mounds and often stone temple chambers within earthen mounds. The Butler> Co. site, Miami Co. site, Fort Hill, Spruce Hill and the Old Stone Fort> at Tennessee are a few of the well known and universally accepted stone> works of Ancient America. Spruce Hill was a 140 acre hilltop with a two> and a quarter mile-long stone wall around the perimeter. A map of the> site is listed in the Smithsonian's 12th annual ethnology report by the> respected Cyrus Thomas who also mapped the stone fort at Flint ridge.> All this info can be seen in Norman Mueller's Glenford Stone Fort and> other Stone Constructions in Ohio and Beyond. From the History of Perry> County Ohio 1902 is a description of the Adena stone hilltop enclosure> and stone burial mound. "Archeologists from all over the land have> visited here and the consensus of opinion is that the Glenford site is> one of the most wonderful of fortifications....it is a fraction over 27> acres. It is made entirely of stone." Also from Gerard Fowke's> Antiquities of MO. 1902 pg 65, "So far as the ability to work in stone> is concerned, some stone chambers which exist in Pike County MO. have> been mentioned as examples of the skill of the Mound Builders in this> respect." Fowkes work is widely known and published in Smithsonian> Ethnology Reports. There is complete consensus within mainstream> archaeology that the Mound Builders built many structures of stone.> Looks like you might have to vet your experts a little better. 3. To> state to me that you cannot carbon date stone is insulting , clearly> only organic material such as charcoal and bone fragments can be carbon> dated. I in fact read a report in my talk from highly respected and> award winning Geochrom labs in Massachusetts about the Mystery Hill site> in New Hampshire. May 30th 1966 sample # GX-1608 submitted by Robert> Stone as given by Archaeologist Jim Whitall. Harold W. Kruger technical> director of Geochron states "you have found something very interesting> from this site with a rather old date of 2995 B.P." Kruger states that> there is a quite an adequate amount of material for dating. Date was> 2995 B.P. +/- 180 C-14 years. Whitall also excavated carbon remains from> the Putney VT. stone chamber that yielded a date of 492 A.D. and> excavated one of the oldest burial mound sites in the country, the> Morrill Point site in Salisbury Ma. He found three human skeletons and> artifacts as well as conclusively proving a stone wall at the site> through carbon dating of layers of organic material is at least 900> years old. The Maritime Archaic site at Morrill Point proved to be 7500> years old and before Mr. Whitall passed away he was joined by Dr. Bruce> Bourque and the highly regarded Dr. William Fitzhugh of the Smithsonian> to make sure he received credit for his amazing discovery. The L'Anse> Amour stone burial mound in Labrador was expertly dated and universally> recognized as being built 7500 years ago proving that stonework in the> northeast goes back at least this far. All this information is readily> available for anyone to see. I know a story about a bit of> pseudoscience. How about the Clovis Barrier, the crowning achievement of> Archaeology, rammed down our throat for 70 years now proven> incontrovertibly false. If you questioned this for years you were> considered a crank and a fool. Do you think a possible revaluation of> other theories that are riddled with unexplained anomalies may happen> soon. The only thing I ask for a fair and open discussion of anomalies> but the system always demonizes the one who points these out, engages in> personal attacks and a misdirection away from the evidence. Does anyone> have Galileo's email address?4. I stated that some researchers believe> that the mound builder culture that started in Watson Brake La. in> roughly 3400 B.C. may have been influenced by contact with societies in> the Yucatan or actual migrations northward by members of that> civilization. In fact there is conclusive proof of trade routes covering> thousands of miles in Ancient America as evidence from artifact finds at> Hopewell sites in Illinois. Mississippian era earthen pyramid temple> building clearly resembles Mesoamerican stone pyramids and huge plazas> such as the one at Cahokia make it perfectly reasonable to assume a> possible, more southerly influence at some time. The geometry and> astronomical orientations of the Mound Builders are widely accepted- see> Bradley Leper the curator of Archaeology at the Ohio Historical> Societies work and Lively and Horn's research on the Newark Octagon. 5.> I, along with many other researchers who have written books on this> matter have collected thousands of accounts in town histories, NYT> articles, the Smithsonian's Ethnology reports, Scientific American and> American Antiquarian of giant skeletal remains being discovered. Many of> these with anatomic anomalies such as double rows of teeth. This occurs> not just in 1840 but through decades of time and across thousands of> miles. The discoveries continued throughout the 1920's, 30's, 40's and> into the 60's. Don Dragoo was directly affiliated with the Carnegie> museum of Natural History from the years 1952-1977. He is considered the> last of the great Adena scholars and by the end of his career was named> curator of the Carnegie's Section of Anthropology. The following is a> quote from his Mounds for the Dead. "Two outstanding traits have been> noted repeatedly for this group. One is the protruding and massive chin> often with prominent bilateral protrusions. (Webb and Snow, 1959 pg.> 37). The second is the large size of many of the males and some of the> females. A male of six feet was common and some individuals approaching> seven feet have been found. Not only were these Adena people tall but> the massiveness of the bones indicates powerfully built individuals. The> head was generally big with a large cranial capacity." Warren K.> Morehead the " Dean of American Archaeology" unearthed giant skeletons> in Illinois, Connecticut and Pennsylvania. I showed accounts of all> three in my presentation. At Tioga Point Pennsylvania. he uncovered 68> skeletons averaging over 7 feet with many much larger, specimens were> sent to the American Investigating Museum where they were later reported> stolen. Ralph Glidden working for the Heye Foundation unearthed 3,781> skeletons averaging 7 feet with the largest 9 foot 2 inches on Catalina> Island CA. I have numerous pictures of these finds including a picture> from the Santa Barbara museum in 1959 of these giant skeleton finds.> This is not a case of gigantism, countless accounts speak of dozens of> skeletons being uncovered, often with bizarre anatomic anomalies. Alex> Hrdlicka, the first head of the Smithsonian Division of Anthropology> starting in 1903 closed the door on the matter of giant skeletal finds> being reported. He guided the Smithsonian to attack and marginalize all> this information but he could not erase the Smithsonian's own Ethnology> reports so he claimed that "giants are no more" and that an inability to> measure correctly and understand human anatomy properly was the reason> why these things were previously reported. Hrdlicka believed in Pre-Nazi> eugenics, thought no civilization existed in America before 4000 years> ago and zealously attacked and intimidated anyone who challenged these> ideas- calling Louis Leaky a heretic to his face and destroying the> career of Warren K. Morehead. Hrdlicka is quoted in the Science News> Letter v13 #353 1928 p21 as claiming "the greatest danger before the> American people is the blending of the Negro tenth of the population> into the superior blood of the white race." In 1937 he published> findings in his Journal of Physical Anthropology to "prove that the> negro race is phylogenetically a closer approach to primitive man than> the white race." And just for good measure in 1927 endorsed findings> comparing African babies with young apes. Before Hrdlicka's reign there> were no denials of giant skeleton finds. Hrdlicka along with many of his> white supremacist colleagues at the Institution purged new evidence and> marginalized and intimidated all who stood in the way of portraying the> races of Ancient America as anything other than unsophisticated. Through> cranial measurement Hrdlicka concluded that Native Americans along with> African Americans were inferior to the white race. As geologist Kirk> Bryan told his students during the reign of Hrdrickla "if you ever find> evidence of human life in a context which is ancient, bury it carefully> but do not forget about it."(from The First American: A study of North> American Archaeology 1971.) Anthropologists and Archaeologists do not> recognize this phenomena, they are reading texts and scientific journals> that have been censored of these accounts. Professionals read over and> over again about normal sized accounts and rightfully think the whole> thing is preposterous. I never claimed that all the Mound Builders were> giants or that they were the architects of the mounds. I am simply> stating that there were thousands of giant skeletal remains uncovered in> Ancient America oftentimes in the burial mounds such as the Grave Creek> mound in WV. From the Charleston Daily Mail October 22nd 1922,> "Archaeologists investigating the mound dug out a skeleton of a female.> The skeleton was 7 foot 4 inches tall and the jawbone would easily fit> over the face of a man weighing 160 pounds. An 8 foot male skeleton was> also found." Once again, this strange anatomic anomaly of a massive> jawbone like I found throughout the town histories of New England.6 I> believe response 5 also answers 6, I will say however you mention> redditskeptic as a source of your investigation. The site specializes in> a series of ad hominem attacks, bad faith arguments, invisible battles> with straw men and personal insults. Essentially an endless stream of> infantile drivel, it is not a place for objective and open-minded> evaluation of evidence by anyone's standards. They continually assail> Deepak Chopra for scientifically unproven theories such as the reality> of "Chakras". By your new standards I suppose you will have to take down> his talks also, he certainly endorses theories determined> pseudoscientific by professionals.7 Bones crumbling to dust is something> to be found over and over again in the historical literature including> the Smithsonian's own Ethnology reports. I was reaching for words such> as mummification or preservation trying to theorize why some bones> crumbled to dust and others didn't. I was just trying to share that many> remains were measured, examined often determined to have strange> anatomic anomalies before they crumbled to dust, some but by no means> all.8 Did the expert who visited the Smithsonian's museums support> center happen to make it over to the David H. Koch's Hall of Human> Origins permanent installation, where an interactive game tells us that> in the future humans may adapt to climate change by "building> underground cities, growing short compact bodies with curved spines to> better move around in tight spaces." I am not talking about mermaids and> Barnum and Bailey hoaxes, were there over one hundred mermaid accounts> from leading scientists of the time published in the New York Times? I> am talking about thousands of accounts from the likes of Moorehead,> Webb, Dragoo, Norris, other Anthropologists, Archaeologists, Professors,> Doctors, Chief Justices and ordinary citizens. They were reporting what> they saw before their own eyes not a discussion of their religious and> political beliefs. How do you tell someone who puts a skull over their> head, fits a jawbone over their face or reports double rows of teeth> that they don't understand human anatomy? Your reasons for pulling my> video are an attempt to portray me as an unsophisticated amateur that> was taken in by some grand hoax. What I did was read through a series of> town history, Smithsonian Ethnology and NYT reports. I was not> advocating a tricky, dangerous and unproven health cure but just trying> to share interesting information from the leading and most respected> Scientific Journals and sources of the time. Any disinterested teenager> can assemble a hundred of these accounts over a weekend with the help of> Google books. I have a large number of accounts that state that the> Smithsonian in fact received many of these giant skeletal remains. So,> why again was my video taken down? The bottom line is that I guess this> is not an idea worth sharing because it reveals corruption and cover-ups> at an institution whose misguided actions are open for anyone to see> with a little historical detective work. Not wanting to speak with me or> allow me to debate these reasons before removing the video is very> troubling. I would hope you would do me the professional courtesy of> whenever or wherever you list the reasons my talk was taken down you> also allow people to see my response. "When a well packaged web of lies> has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will> seem utterly preposterous and it's speaker a raving lunatic." Dresden> James. Thank you,James E. Vieira"> http://www.facebook.com/pages/Stone-Builders-Mound-Builders-and-the-Gian\> ts-of-Ancient-America/556606251021542?ref=stream> > Susan English -- sent from my iPad>

Rick O

Good call, Steve! One exception: Piltdown man was a 20th century event (that has never been radio carbon dated to actually determine by scientific method

Message 5 of 10
, Dec 22, 2012

0 Attachment

Good call, Steve! One exception: Piltdown man was a 20th century event (that has never been radio carbon dated to actually determine by scientific method whether it was a hoax- it was "assessed" as a hoax). And, yes, showmanship or newspaper sales are both possible motivations in at least some of the accounts. However, many accounts, including the one I investigated thoroughly, include the names of the discovers. In the local case, I was able to verify that two of the folks named were real and contemporary to the news item. One was the acting Justice of the Peace at the time.

http://youtu.be/o-JFrKsasUU

For a video account of the initial investigation

--- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "bigalemc2" wrote:>> Susan -> Steve Garcia here. I don't post comments here very often at all,> because I don't have much to contribute. But there is at least one> issue Vierira addresses that I will contend with. I think Vierira is> pulling off a speculative hipshooting on the issue of the giants.> Ed Grondine's book, "Man and Impact in the Americas" discusses the> Indian accounts of the giants and giant skeletons found by settlers. > They are sober accounts, with very little if any P.T. Barnum in any of> them. Vierira is simply doing the arky 'sweep it under the carpet'> hoping everyone will bow to his supposed expertise. But he shows he> doesn't even know what he is talking about. Keep your eye on the pea. > Vierira never talks about the giants in the areas where giants really> did have remains found - with measurements in some cases.> Vierira:

You share newspaper clippings from the 19th century,> including quotes from Abraham Lincoln, and claim they are evidence of> giants. In fact, as one of our experts writes, "Skeletal hoaxes were> common in the 19th century (e.g., Piltdown Man, the Cardiff Giant, and> Barnum & Bailey Fiji mermaids [now at Harvard's Peabody Museum]). If> (and this is a big if) the 8-foot skeleton is real, it could be a case> of medical gigantism, but it is more likely a case of exaggeration."6.> With respect to the theories of gigantism, the TEDx fact checkers spoke> to an expert who researched Middle Woodland and Mississippian skeletal> collections at the Center for American Archaeology (CAA), based in> Kampsville, IL, in 2007. The CAA is one of the largest repositories of> excavated Woodland and Mississippian skeletal remains in the nation, and> their osteological collections are available for student and scholarly> study. One expert stated "I can assure you that the archaeological> Woodland and Mississippian populations were not giants. In some cases,> one can observe a slight decrease in average height (a few centimeters)> with the transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture. This is a> trend that is observed in many cultures that undergo an agricultural> transition, and is likely related to shorter nursing times and increased> early childhood grain consumption (maximum height is highly correlated> to childhood protein consumption, so a high reliance on grain during> childhood tends to result in shorter stature)."

> The first thing Vierira does is discount all the news accounts as "19th> century" as if that makes them written by a bunch of country bumpkins> who wouldn't know a large skeleton from a tree.> Then he makes another sweeping statement piling all the accounts into> one pile - with P.T. Barnum (show biz and much later in the 19th> century) and Piltdown Man (England). "Skeletal hoaxes were common in> the 19th century" - what is wrong with this? It is a wave-of-the-hand> generality that means nothing. My money says he did not put ONE> second's effort into researching "the 19th century" (a generality in> itself) and its scams - and then broadly includes the entire world in> his entire 19th century. This is a common modern hubris in science -> that people - even scientists - in earlier times were not as capable as> modern people to observe evidence clearly, thus that earlier evidence> should be discounted. By this kind (Vierira) of "scientific review" all> the work of Maxwell, Faraday, Davy, Watt and thousands of other> scientists can be included in the doubtful "19th century" scams. By> associating these in his ill-informed under-the-rug move, he hopes to> convince people that all 19th century evidence is unreliable - based on> nothing more than his say so. If I am not mistaken, Vierira never> looked at ONE of the newspaper accounts himself - which is a scientific> strategy but a scientific scam, which goes, "I am the authority, so> listen to everything I myself say and ignore anything I tell you to> ignore." They do this without doing ONE bit of actual research on the> specific subject.> He even admits he has not looked at the evidence when he says, "If (and> this is a big if) the 8-foot skeleton is real." Then he really puolls a> boner, when he says, "it could be a case of medical gigantism." Why a> boner? Because he is frankly admitting he is speculating (using the> word "could"). He follow up that speculation with another: "but it is> more likely a case of exaggeration." "More likely" means that he again> did not even look at the evidence, but is pulling this out of> you-know-where - and expecting you the reader to just sit down, listen> and shut up.> In the following I will leave out the numerous other references to> skeletons or skulls of enormous stature or size. I accept the word of> the many common people from many locations far afield of each other, and> with no axe to grind, that when they say a skeleton is enormous or> gigantic, they will be comparing the remains with their general> experience and would not mention extraordinary size unless it was> remarkable. :> From Ed's book (p 117) "[]...the skeletons of eight persons... measuring> eight feet from head to toe. . . the leg bone extended six inches above> his knee." I will ask what some member of the Warren Commission asked> about the autopsy of JFK: "Do you accept that the person was capable of> reading the numbers on a ruler"? (footnote available on request)> (p 124) "[Ashtabula, OH] ...This land at one time was owned by Mr. Peleg> Sweet, who was a man of large size and full features; and it is narrated> that at one time he, in digging, came upon a skull and jaw which were of> such size that the skull would cover his head, and the jw could be> easily slipped over his face, as though the head of the giant were> enveloping his..."> (p 127) "[Erie, PA] ...Amongst the skeletons was one of a giant, side by> side with a smaller one, probably his wife. The arm and legs of this> [N]ative American Goliath were about one-half longer than those of the> tallest man among the laborers; the skull was immensely large' the lower> jawbone easily slipped over the face and whiskers of a full faced> man..."> Ed has such accounts - footnoted - in several of his chapters, of what> he calls the Copper Trading Giants, because they play a part over some> time period, until they are killed off by other tribes.> I recommend the book "Man and Impact in the Americas" both as good> reading and as a reference. It is only available in soft cover, and> only from Ed himself. See his listing at cosmictusk.com for how to get> a copy.> Steve Garcia> --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wrote:> >> > (Cal, i was stirred deeply by your last letter...recalled how lucky i> > was to have et you at a conference in Provo or Salt Lake City maybe> > almost two decades ago)> > Ancient Waterways friends. Happy Holidays!> > Minnesota researcher Larry Furo sent an update today to another group> I> > have great interest in. It is a lengthy, but sincere, well-written> > letter and the latest word from Ashfield, Massachuetts stonemason,> James> > Vieira who has been mentioned at AWS before by some of you, though i> > think his last name at our site was spelled incorrectly. At least two> > members know him personally and have expressed great respect for him.> > Again, a broad subject and lengthy letter from him. But I and many> here> > and diffusionists as well as many academics as well have long held> much> > interest and may find it well worth stepping further into the diligent> > efforts of James Vierira.> > First, a somewhat random link about him first (i fell on blue ice> > covered with right inches of snow in a blizzard this AM trying to pick> > up a Christmas tree before my children from three states come north> for> > our weekend holiday celebration. I hurt my neck something fierce,> > waived off an ambulance and cannot linger long here). Next, i hope> will> > follow his most recent public letter he posted at his Facebook page> > under this title: Stone Builders, Mound Builders and the Giants of> > Ancient America | Jim Vieira> >> http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2012/12/stone-builders-mound-builde\> \> > rs-and-the-giants-of-ancient-america-jim-vieira-2506330.html> > > ers-and-the-giants-of-ancient-america-jim-vieira-2506330.html>> > Scanned, for those not signed into FB, from James E. Vieira, his> > response to recent censorship, etc.:> > "After 120,000 views, the #1 most watched tedx video in the world> during> > the month it was up, my talk has been removed. I am posting the resons> > given and my response. A long but interesting read about how> censorship> > can happen. Thanks JimAt 2:03 -- You claim: "These structures are so> > staggering that people don't even think they exist still." In> > fact, there is a general archaeological consensus about the impressive> > civilization demonstrated by the moundbuilders in Cahokia and similar> > sites.2. At 4:05 -- You claim: "The moundbuilders who built all> > kinds of structures." All evidence for the moundbuilders'> > architecture suggests that they built with sod packets and wood.3. At> > 4:19 -- You mention carbon-dating but do not specify what was> > carbon-dated. You cannot carbon-date stone. Again at 6:00.4. At 7:26> --> > You mention Mayan theories. Since the recent deciphering of almost the> > full Mayan script, the astronomical preoccupation attributed to Mayan> > writings has been largely discredited. Most of the numbers found in> the> > Mayan script are now believed to be dates of births, coronations and> > wars.5. At 9:15 -- You share newspaper clippings from the 19th> century,> > including quotes from Abraham Lincoln, and claim they are evidence of> > giants. In fact, as one of our experts writes, "Skeletal hoaxes were> > common in the 19th century (e.g., Piltdown Man, the Cardiff Giant, and> > Barnum & Bailey Fiji mermaids [now at Harvard's Peabody Museum]). If> > (and this is a big if) the 8-foot skeleton is real, it could be a case> > of medical gigantism, but it is more likely a case of exaggeration."6.> > With respect to the theories of gigantism, the TEDx fact checkers> spoke> > to an expert who researched Middle Woodland and Mississippian skeletal> > collections at the Center for American Archaeology (CAA), based in> > Kampsville, IL, in 2007. The CAA is one of the largest repositories of> > excavated Woodland and Mississippian skeletal remains in the nation,> and> > their osteological collections are available for student and scholarly> > study. One expert stated "I can assure you that the archaeological> > Woodland and Mississippian populations were not giants. In some cases,> > one can observe a slight decrease in average height (a few> centimeters)> > with the transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture. This is> a> > trend that is observed in many cultures that undergo an agricultural> > transition, and is likely related to shorter nursing times and> increased> > early childhood grain consumption (maximum height is highly correlated> > to childhood protein consumption, so a high reliance on grain during> > childhood tends to result in shorter stature)."7. At 12:49 -- "Bones> > crumbled away because they weren't mummified." Skeletal> > preservation and mummification are unrelated processes. Plenty of> > skeletons survive in New England, and the disappearance of any and all> > skeletons that could lend evidence to these claims today is highly> > suspect.8. With respect to repeated claims that the Smithsonian is> > hiding or covering up evidence, the fact checkers also heard this, as> > well: "In 2007 I was a visiting scientist at the Smithsonian Museum> > Support Center, and while it is full of amazing and bizarre material> > (e.g., an entire herd of elephants that Teddy Roosevelt shot occupies> > one floor), there is no conspiracy to cover up or hide Native American> > giant skeletons or artifacts. Like most museums, the Smithsonian> > displays less than 1% of its collections at any given time, meaning> that> > a lot of material spends decades (or sadly centuries) in its vaults> > awaiting exhibition. We can debate whether or not this is responsible> > stewardship (a debate that would also have to include a discussion of> > the chronic underfunding of public museums and the economics of public> > education), but to portray the Smithsonian today as part of some sort> of> > a conspiracy of `misinformation and corruption' to cover up> > Native American history by hiding giant moundbuilder skeletons> excavated> > in the 19th century is ridiculous. Smithsonian physical> anthropologists> > have published an impressive body of literature on the analysis of> their> > collections."I am writing to respond to the stated reasons why my TEDX> > talk was removed. 1. My assertion is that the staggering structures of> > the Mound Builders are largely unknown by the general public. I did> not> > state that Archaeologists were unaware of this, I simply stated that> the> > large majority of the population has no idea that they existed. I have> > presented to thousands of people and always ask if anyone has ever> heard> > of the Mound Builders and their creations; no more than a handful has> > said yes. Despite the astounding engineering feats and widespread> > construction of mind-boggling earthen pyramids and geometric forms in> > Ancient America this is barely discussed in high school or college> > education. The TED Board's assertion is a transparent attempt to> portray> > me as lacking a basic understanding of Archaeological theory.2. This> > statement is false. Actually, this helps prove my point that the works> > of the Mound Builders are poorly understood, even by the experts . The> > Mound Builders are well known for building with stone. There is> > absolutely an archaeological consensus for this. The Adena , Hopewell> > and Fort Ancient cultures built massive stone wall complexes, stone> > mounds and often stone temple chambers within earthen mounds. The> Butler> > Co. site, Miami Co. site, Fort Hill, Spruce Hill and the Old Stone> Fort> > at Tennessee are a few of the well known and universally accepted> stone> > works of Ancient America. Spruce Hill was a 140 acre hilltop with a> two> > and a quarter mile-long stone wall around the perimeter. A map of the> > site is listed in the Smithsonian's 12th annual ethnology report by> the> > respected Cyrus Thomas who also mapped the stone fort at Flint ridge.> > All this info can be seen in Norman Mueller's Glenford Stone Fort and> > other Stone Constructions in Ohio and Beyond. From the History of> Perry> > County Ohio 1902 is a description of the Adena stone hilltop enclosure> > and stone burial mound. "Archeologists from all over the land have> > visited here and the consensus of opinion is that the Glenford site is> > one of the most wonderful of fortifications....it is a fraction over> 27> > acres. It is made entirely of stone." Also from Gerard Fowke's> > Antiquities of MO. 1902 pg 65, "So far as the ability to work in stone> > is concerned, some stone chambers which exist in Pike County MO. have> > been mentioned as examples of the skill of the Mound Builders in this> > respect." Fowkes work is widely known and published in Smithsonian> > Ethnology Reports. There is complete consensus within mainstream> > archaeology that the Mound Builders built many structures of stone.> > Looks like you might have to vet your experts a little better. 3. To> > state to me that you cannot carbon date stone is insulting , clearly> > only organic material such as charcoal and bone fragments can be> carbon> > dated. I in fact read a report in my talk from highly respected and> > award winning Geochrom labs in Massachusetts about the Mystery Hill> site> > in New Hampshire. May 30th 1966 sample # GX-1608 submitted by Robert> > Stone as given by Archaeologist Jim Whitall. Harold W. Kruger> technical> > director of Geochron states "you have found something very interesting> > from this site with a rather old date of 2995 B.P." Kruger states that> > there is a quite an adequate amount of material for dating. Date was> > 2995 B.P. +/- 180 C-14 years. Whitall also excavated carbon remains> from> > the Putney VT. stone chamber that yielded a date of 492 A.D. and> > excavated one of the oldest burial mound sites in the country, the> > Morrill Point site in Salisbury Ma. He found three human skeletons and> > artifacts as well as conclusively proving a stone wall at the site> > through carbon dating of layers of organic material is at least 900> > years old. The Maritime Archaic site at Morrill Point proved to be> 7500> > years old and before Mr. Whitall passed away he was joined by Dr.> Bruce> > Bourque and the highly regarded Dr. William Fitzhugh of the> Smithsonian> > to make sure he received credit for his amazing discovery. The L'Anse> > Amour stone burial mound in Labrador was expertly dated and> universally> > recognized as being built 7500 years ago proving that stonework in the> > northeast goes back at least this far. All this information is readily> > available for anyone to see. I know a story about a bit of> > pseudoscience. How about the Clovis Barrier, the crowning achievement> of> > Archaeology, rammed down our throat for 70 years now proven> > incontrovertibly false. If you questioned this for years you were> > considered a crank and a fool. Do you think a possible revaluation of> > other theories that are riddled with unexplained anomalies may happen> > soon. The only thing I ask for a fair and open discussion of anomalies> > but the system always demonizes the one who points these out, engages> in> > personal attacks and a misdirection away from the evidence. Does> anyone> > have Galileo's email address?4. I stated that some researchers believe> > that the mound builder culture that started in Watson Brake La. in> > roughly 3400 B.C. may have been influenced by contact with societies> in> > the Yucatan or actual migrations northward by members of that> > civilization. In fact there is conclusive proof of trade routes> covering> > thousands of miles in Ancient America as evidence from artifact finds> at> > Hopewell sites in Illinois. Mississippian era earthen pyramid temple> > building clearly resembles Mesoamerican stone pyramids and huge plazas> > such as the one at Cahokia make it perfectly reasonable to assume a> > possible, more southerly influence at some time. The geometry and> > astronomical orientations of the Mound Builders are widely accepted-> see> > Bradley Leper the curator of Archaeology at the Ohio Historical> > Societies work and Lively and Horn's research on the Newark Octagon.> 5.> > I, along with many other researchers who have written books on this> > matter have collected thousands of accounts in town histories, NYT> > articles, the Smithsonian's Ethnology reports, Scientific American and> > American Antiquarian of giant skeletal remains being discovered. Many> of> > these with anatomic anomalies such as double rows of teeth. This> occurs> > not just in 1840 but through decades of time and across thousands of> > miles. The discoveries continued throughout the 1920's, 30's, 40's and> > into the 60's. Don Dragoo was directly affiliated with the Carnegie> > museum of Natural History from the years 1952-1977. He is considered> the> > last of the great Adena scholars and by the end of his career was> named> > curator of the Carnegie's Section of Anthropology. The following is a> > quote from his Mounds for the Dead. "Two outstanding traits have been> > noted repeatedly for this group. One is the protruding and massive> chin> > often with prominent bilateral protrusions. (Webb and Snow, 1959 pg.> > 37). The second is the large size of many of the males and some of the> > females. A male of six feet was common and some individuals> approaching> > seven feet have been found. Not only were these Adena people tall but> > the massiveness of the bones indicates powerfully built individuals.> The> > head was generally big with a large cranial capacity." Warren K.> > Morehead the " Dean of American Archaeology" unearthed giant skeletons> > in Illinois, Connecticut and Pennsylvania. I showed accounts of all> > three in my presentation. At Tioga Point Pennsylvania. he uncovered 68> > skeletons averaging over 7 feet with many much larger, specimens were> > sent to the American Investigating Museum where they were later> reported> > stolen. Ralph Glidden working for the Heye Foundation unearthed 3,781> > skeletons averaging 7 feet with the largest 9 foot 2 inches on> Catalina> > Island CA. I have numerous pictures of these finds including a picture> > from the Santa Barbara museum in 1959 of these giant skeleton finds.> > This is not a case of gigantism, countless accounts speak of dozens of> > skeletons being uncovered, often with bizarre anatomic anomalies. Alex> > Hrdlicka, the first head of the Smithsonian Division of Anthropology> > starting in 1903 closed the door on the matter of giant skeletal finds> > being reported. He guided the Smithsonian to attack and marginalize> all> > this information but he could not erase the Smithsonian's own> Ethnology> > reports so he claimed that "giants are no more" and that an inability> to> > measure correctly and understand human anatomy properly was the reason> > why these things were previously reported. Hrdlicka believed in> Pre-Nazi> > eugenics, thought no civilization existed in America before 4000 years> > ago and zealously attacked and intimidated anyone who challenged these> > ideas- calling Louis Leaky a heretic to his face and destroying the> > career of Warren K. Morehead. Hrdlicka is quoted in the Science News> > Letter v13 #353 1928 p21 as claiming "the greatest danger before the> > American people is the blending of the Negro tenth of the population> > into the superior blood of the white race." In 1937 he published> > findings in his Journal of Physical Anthropology to "prove that the> > negro race is phylogenetically a closer approach to primitive man than> > the white race." And just for good measure in 1927 endorsed findings> > comparing African babies with young apes. Before Hrdlicka's reign> there> > were no denials of giant skeleton finds. Hrdlicka along with many of> his> > white supremacist colleagues at the Institution purged new evidence> and> > marginalized and intimidated all who stood in the way of portraying> the> > races of Ancient America as anything other than unsophisticated.> Through> > cranial measurement Hrdlicka concluded that Native Americans along> with> > African Americans were inferior to the white race. As geologist Kirk> > Bryan told his students during the reign of Hrdrickla "if you ever> find> > evidence of human life in a context which is ancient, bury it> carefully> > but do not forget about it."(from The First American: A study of North> > American Archaeology 1971.) Anthropologists and Archaeologists do not> > recognize this phenomena, they are reading texts and scientific> journals> > that have been censored of these accounts. Professionals read over and> > over again about normal sized accounts and rightfully think the whole> > thing is preposterous. I never claimed that all the Mound Builders> were> > giants or that they were the architects of the mounds. I am simply> > stating that there were thousands of giant skeletal remains uncovered> in> > Ancient America oftentimes in the burial mounds such as the Grave> Creek> > mound in WV. From the Charleston Daily Mail October 22nd 1922,> > "Archaeologists investigating the mound dug out a skeleton of a> female.> > The skeleton was 7 foot 4 inches tall and the jawbone would easily fit> > over the face of a man weighing 160 pounds. An 8 foot male skeleton> was> > also found." Once again, this strange anatomic anomaly of a massive> > jawbone like I found throughout the town histories of New England.6 I> > believe response 5 also answers 6, I will say however you mention> > redditskeptic as a source of your investigation. The site specializes> in> > a series of ad hominem attacks, bad faith arguments, invisible battles> > with straw men and personal insults. Essentially an endless stream of> > infantile drivel, it is not a place for objective and open-minded> > evaluation of evidence by anyone's standards. They continually assail> > Deepak Chopra for scientifically unproven theories such as the reality> > of "Chakras". By your new standards I suppose you will have to take> down> > his talks also, he certainly endorses theories determined> > pseudoscientific by professionals.7 Bones crumbling to dust is> something> > to be found over and over again in the historical literature including> > the Smithsonian's own Ethnology reports. I was reaching for words such> > as mummification or preservation trying to theorize why some bones> > crumbled to dust and others didn't. I was just trying to share that> many> > remains were measured, examined often determined to have strange> > anatomic anomalies before they crumbled to dust, some but by no means> > all.8 Did the expert who visited the Smithsonian's museums support> > center happen to make it over to the David H. Koch's Hall of Human> > Origins permanent installation, where an interactive game tells us> that> > in the future humans may adapt to climate change by "building> > underground cities, growing short compact bodies with curved spines to> > better move around in tight spaces." I am not talking about mermaids> and> > Barnum and Bailey hoaxes, were there over one hundred mermaid accounts> > from leading scientists of the time published in the New York Times? I> > am talking about thousands of accounts from the likes of Moorehead,> > Webb, Dragoo, Norris, other Anthropologists, Archaeologists,> Professors,> > Doctors, Chief Justices and ordinary citizens. They were reporting> what> > they saw before their own eyes not a discussion of their religious and> > political beliefs. How do you tell someone who puts a skull over their> > head, fits a jawbone over their face or reports double rows of teeth> > that they don't understand human anatomy? Your reasons for pulling my> > video are an attempt to portray me as an unsophisticated amateur that> > was taken in by some grand hoax. What I did was read through a series> of> > town history, Smithsonian Ethnology and NYT reports. I was not> > advocating a tricky, dangerous and unproven health cure but just> trying> > to share interesting information from the leading and most respected> > Scientific Journals and sources of the time. Any disinterested> teenager> > can assemble a hundred of these accounts over a weekend with the help> of> > Google books. I have a large number of accounts that state that the> > Smithsonian in fact received many of these giant skeletal remains. So,> > why again was my video taken down? The bottom line is that I guess> this> > is not an idea worth sharing because it reveals corruption and> cover-ups> > at an institution whose misguided actions are open for anyone to see> > with a little historical detective work. Not wanting to speak with me> or> > allow me to debate these reasons before removing the video is very> > troubling. I would hope you would do me the professional courtesy of> > whenever or wherever you list the reasons my talk was taken down you> > also allow people to see my response. "When a well packaged web of> lies> > has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will> > seem utterly preposterous and it's speaker a raving lunatic." Dresden> > James. Thank you,James E. Vieira"> >> http://www.facebook.com/pages/Stone-Builders-Mound-Builders-and-the-Gian\> \> > ts-of-Ancient-America/556606251021542?ref=stream> >> > Susan English -- sent from my iPad> >>

bigalemc2

Note to all: I received the following in an email. I trust I have permission to paste it in here:On 12/22/2012 3:35 PM, Gumba wrote: With all due respect Mr.

Message 6 of 10
, Dec 23, 2012

0 Attachment

Note to all:

I received the following in an email. I trust I have permission to paste it in here:

On 12/22/2012 3:35 PM, Gumba wrote:

With all due respect Mr. Garcia, I believe you may have mis-read what Jim Vieira has said. The quotations you cite, are actually Stacy Kontrabecki from the TEDx venue. She was asked to remove the TEDx talk Jim Vieira gave in November, after archaeologists and the Smithsonian were furious about his presentation.
http://tedxshelburnefalls.wordpress.com/2012/12/14/jim-vieiras-talk-removed-from-internet/
Jim has compiled thousands of accounts of giant skeleton discoveries, sober accounts and written records in News papers, historical journals, and the Smithsonian ethnology reports.
This is the video which TEDx removed, after it had become viral in 2 weeks, getting 120,000 views. Luckily someone re-uploaded it for the third time. TEDx is actively hunting down and deleting any re-uploads of the video, citing copyright violations.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_FSmvBgHUc
The cover-up of this information is in full swing. Jim was recently on Coast to Coast AM radio with George Noory discussing the reports of gigantic Indians, skeletons, and stone and mound structures and the Smithsonian cover-ups under Ales Hrdlicka which continues to this day.
J.S.

I apologize to Viera (spelling included - I still am not sure of the spelling, but think it is "Viera"). If this was from Stacy Kontrabecki, I still can't find that name in there, but accept that Gumbo is correct.

So, those reading my long comment should replace Viera's name with Kontrabecki's name.

I completely agree with anyone who shakes his/her head at the Nazi tactics of Hrdlicka, the biggest jaggoff in the history of anthropology, and one who has injured it immensely and set it back/held it back by many decades. His dictatorial thinking and actions have blocked so much and cost USA anthropology so many thousands of valid artifacts which have - because of him, specifically, and his book-burner-like followers - not been preserved and are now lost forever.

Hopefully the true history can overcome the Hrdlicka Affect and still be reconstructed.

Steve Garcia

P.S. ---- Rick O., yes, Piltdown has NEVER been - and never will, now - be forensically proven one way or another. And I did not remember it was after 1900, so thanks for that.

....From the sober tone of the articles I've seen quoted, I cannot credit any broad generalizations of 'hoax' in 19th century accounts. Mention in news articles is not exactly a way of making money. America has always had many entrepreneurs who have tried many 'come-ons' - but being mentioned in news articles is not a superhighway to riches. Most come-ons I have ever seen or heard of have been roadside signs and cheesy displays in ramshackle stands - that earn meager incomes not worth much.

But to glomp ALL mentions of giant skeletons/skulls from ALL locations in several states over several decades makes the accuser look dumber than George W Bush and more tinfoil than UFOs. For academics to adopt that position is farcical. The real hoax is theirs, in the end.

--- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "Rick O" wrote:>> Good call, Steve! One exception: Piltdown man was a 20th century event> (that has never been radio carbon dated to actually determine by> scientific method whether it was a hoax- it was "assessed" as a hoax).> And, yes, showmanship or newspaper sales are both possible motivations> in at least some of the accounts. However, many accounts, including the> one I investigated thoroughly, include the names of the discovers. In> the local case, I was able to verify that two of the folks named were> real and contemporary to the news item. One was the acting Justice of> the Peace at the time.> http://youtu.be/o-JFrKsasUU> > For a video account of the initial investigation> > > --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "bigalemc2" wrote:> >> > Susan -> > Steve Garcia here. I don't post comments here very often at all,> > because I don't have much to contribute. But there is at least one> > issue Vierira addresses that I will contend with. I think Vierira is> > pulling off a speculative hipshooting on the issue of the giants.> > Ed Grondine's book, "Man and Impact in the Americas" discusses the> > Indian accounts of the giants and giant skeletons found by settlers.> > They are sober accounts, with very little if any P.T. Barnum in any of> > them. Vierira is simply doing the arky 'sweep it under the carpet'> > hoping everyone will bow to his supposed expertise. But he shows he> > doesn't even know what he is talking about. Keep your eye on the pea.> > Vierira never talks about the giants in the areas where giants really> > did have remains found - with measurements in some cases.> > Vierira:You share newspaper clippings from the 19th century,> > including quotes from Abraham Lincoln, and claim they are evidence of> > giants. In fact, as one of our experts writes, "Skeletal hoaxes were> > common in the 19th century (e.g., Piltdown Man, the Cardiff Giant, and> > Barnum & Bailey Fiji mermaids [now at Harvard's Peabody Museum]). If> > (and this is a big if) the 8-foot skeleton is real, it could be a case> > of medical gigantism, but it is more likely a case of exaggeration."6.> > With respect to the theories of gigantism, the TEDx fact checkers> spoke to an expert who researched Middle Woodland and Mississippian skeletal> > collections at the Center for American Archaeology (CAA), based in> > Kampsville, IL, in 2007. The CAA is one of the largest repositories of> > excavated Woodland and Mississippian skeletal remains in the nation,> and their osteological collections are available for student and scholarly> > study. One expert stated "I can assure you that the archaeological> > Woodland and Mississippian populations were not giants. In some cases,> > one can observe a slight decrease in average height (a few> centimeters)> > with the transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture. This is> a trend that is observed in many cultures that undergo an agricultural> > transition, and is likely related to shorter nursing times and> increased early childhood grain consumption (maximum height is highly correlated> > to childhood protein consumption, so a high reliance on grain during> > childhood tends to result in shorter stature)."> > The first thing Vierira does is discount all the news accounts as> "19th century" as if that makes them written by a bunch of country bumpkins> > who wouldn't know a large skeleton from a tree.> > Then he makes another sweeping statement piling all the accounts into> > one pile - with P.T. Barnum (show biz and much later in the 19th> > century) and Piltdown Man (England). "Skeletal hoaxes were common in> > the 19th century" - what is wrong with this? It is a wave-of-the-hand> > generality that means nothing. My money says he did not put ONE> > second's effort into researching "the 19th century" (a generality in> > itself) and its scams - and then broadly includes the entire world in> > his entire 19th century. This is a common modern hubris in science -> > that people - even scientists - in earlier times were not as capable> as modern people to observe evidence clearly, thus that earlier evidence> > should be discounted. By this kind (Vierira) of "scientific review"> all the work of Maxwell, Faraday, Davy, Watt and thousands of other> > scientists can be included in the doubtful "19th century" scams. By> > associating these in his ill-informed under-the-rug move, he hopes to> > convince people that all 19th century evidence is unreliable - based> on nothing more than his say so. If I am not mistaken, Vierira never> > looked at ONE of the newspaper accounts himself - which is a> scientific strategy but a scientific scam, which goes, "I am the authority, so> > listen to everything I myself say and ignore anything I tell you to> > ignore." They do this without doing ONE bit of actual research on the> > specific subject.> > He even admits he has not looked at the evidence when he says, "If> (and this is a big if) the 8-foot skeleton is real." Then he really pulls> a boner, when he says, "it could be a case of medical gigantism." Why a> > boner? Because he is frankly admitting he is speculating (using the> > word "could"). He follows up that speculation with another: "but it is> > more likely a case of exaggeration." "More likely" means that he> again did not even look at the evidence, but is pulling this out of> > you-know-where - and expecting you the reader to just sit down, listen> > and shut up.> > In the following I will leave out the numerous other references to> > skeletons or skulls of enormous stature or size. I accept the word of> > the many common people from many locations far afield of each other,> and with no axe to grind, that when they say a skeleton is enormous or> > gigantic, they will be comparing the remains with their general> > experience and would not mention extraordinary size unless it was> > remarkable. :> > From Ed's book (p 117) "[]...the skeletons of eight persons...> measuring eight feet from head to toe. . . the leg bone extended six inches> above his knee." I will ask what some member of the Warren Commission asked> > about the autopsy of JFK: "Do you accept that the person was capable> of reading the numbers on a ruler"? (footnote available on request)> > (p 124) "[Ashtabula, OH] ...This land at one time was owned by Mr.> Peleg Sweet, who was a man of large size and full features; and it is> narrated that at one time he, in digging, came upon a skull and jaw which were> of such size that the skull would cover his head, and the jaw could be> > easily slipped over his face, as though the head of the giant were> > enveloping his..."> > (p 127) "[Erie, PA] ...Amongst the skeletons was one of a giant, side> by side with a smaller one, probably his wife. The arm and legs of this> > [N]ative American Goliath were about one-half longer than those of the> > tallest man among the laborers; the skull was immensely large' the> lower jawbone easily slipped over the face and whiskers of a full faced man..."> > Ed has such accounts - footnoted - in several of his chapters, of what> > he calls the Copper Trading Giants, because they play a part over some> > time period, until they are killed off by other tribes.> > I recommend the book "Man and Impact in the Americas" both as good> > reading and as a reference. It is only available in soft cover, and> > only from Ed himself. See his listing at cosmictusk.com for how to> get a copy.> > Steve Garcia> > --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wrote:> > >> > > (Cal, i was stirred deeply by your last letter...recalled how lucky> > > I was to have met you at a conference in Provo or Salt Lake City maybe> > > almost two decades ago)> > > Ancient Waterways friends. Happy Holidays!> > > Minnesota researcher Larry Furo sent an update today to another> group I have great interest in. It is a lengthy, but sincere, well-written> > > letter and the latest word from Ashfield, Massachuetts stonemason,> > James Vieira who has been mentioned at AWS before by some of you, though i> > > think his last name at our site was spelled incorrectly. At least> two members know him personally and have expressed great respect for> him. Again, a broad subject and lengthy letter from him. But I and many> > here and diffusionists as well as many academics as well have long held> > much interest and may find it well worth stepping further into the> diligent efforts of James Vierira.> > > First, a somewhat random link about him first (i fell on blue ice> > > covered with right inches of snow in a blizzard this AM trying to> pick up a Christmas tree before my children from three states come north> > for our weekend holiday celebration. I hurt my neck something fierce,> > > waived off an ambulance and cannot linger long here). Next, i hope> > will follow his most recent public letter he posted at his Facebook page> > > under this title: Stone Builders, Mound Builders and the Giants of> > > Ancient America | Jim Vieira> > >> >> http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2012/12/stone-builders-mound-builders-and-the-giants-of-ancient-america-jim-vieira-2506330.html> > >> > > Scanned, for those not signed into FB, from James E. Vieira, his> > > response to recent censorship, etc.:> > > "After 120,000 views, the #1 most watched tedx video in the world> > during the month it was up, my talk has been removed. I am posting the> resons given and my response. A long but interesting read about how> > censorship can happen. Thanks JimAt 2:03 -- You claim: "These structures are so> > > staggering that people don't even think they exist still." In> > > fact, there is a general archaeological consensus about the> impressive civilization demonstrated by the moundbuilders in Cahokia and> similar sites.2. At 4:05 -- You claim: "The moundbuilders who built all> > > kinds of structures." All evidence for the moundbuilders'> > > architecture suggests that they built with sod packets and wood.3.> At 4:19 -- You mention carbon-dating but do not specify what was> > > carbon-dated. You cannot carbon-date stone. Again at 6:00.4. At 7:26> > -- You mention Mayan theories. Since the recent deciphering of almost> the full Mayan script, the astronomical preoccupation attributed to> Mayan writings has been largely discredited. Most of the numbers found in> > the Mayan script are now believed to be dates of births, coronations and> > > wars.5. At 9:15 -- You share newspaper clippings from the 19th> > century, including quotes from Abraham Lincoln, and claim they are evidence> of giants. In fact, as one of our experts writes, "Skeletal hoaxes were> > > common in the 19th century (e.g., Piltdown Man, the Cardiff Giant,> and Barnum & Bailey Fiji mermaids [now at Harvard's Peabody Museum]). If> > > (and this is a big if) the 8-foot skeleton is real, it could be a> case of medical gigantism, but it is more likely a case of> exaggeration."6. With respect to the theories of gigantism, the TEDx fact checkers> > spoke to an expert who researched Middle Woodland and Mississippian> skeletal collections at the Center for American Archaeology (CAA), based in> > > Kampsville, IL, in 2007. The CAA is one of the largest repositories> of excavated Woodland and Mississippian skeletal remains in the nation,> > and their osteological collections are available for student and> scholarly study. One expert stated "I can assure you that the archaeological> > > Woodland and Mississippian populations were not giants. In some> cases, one can observe a slight decrease in average height (a few> > centimeters) with the transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture. This> is a trend that is observed in many cultures that undergo an agricultural> > > transition, and is likely related to shorter nursing times and> > increased early childhood grain consumption (maximum height is highly> correlated to childhood protein consumption, so a high reliance on grain during> > > childhood tends to result in shorter stature)."7. At 12:49 -- "Bones> > > crumbled away because they weren't mummified." Skeletal> > > preservation and mummification are unrelated processes. Plenty of> > > skeletons survive in New England, and the disappearance of any and> all skeletons that could lend evidence to these claims today is highly> > > suspect.8. With respect to repeated claims that the Smithsonian is> > > hiding or covering up evidence, the fact checkers also heard this,> as well: "In 2007 I was a visiting scientist at the Smithsonian Museum> > > Support Center, and while it is full of amazing and bizarre material> > > (e.g., an entire herd of elephants that Teddy Roosevelt shot> occupies one floor), there is no conspiracy to cover up or hide Native> American giant skeletons or artifacts. Like most museums, the Smithsonian> > > displays less than 1% of its collections at any given time, meaning> > that a lot of material spends decades (or sadly centuries) in its vaults> > > awaiting exhibition. We can debate whether or not this is> responsible stewardship (a debate that would also have to include a discussion> of the chronic underfunding of public museums and the economics of> public education), but to portray the Smithsonian today as part of some> sort of a conspiracy of `misinformation and corruption' to cover up> > > Native American history by hiding giant moundbuilder skeletons> > excavated in the 19th century is ridiculous. Smithsonian physical> > anthropologists have published an impressive body of literature on the analysis of> > their collections."I am writing to respond to the stated reasons why my> TEDX talk was removed. 1. My assertion is that the staggering structures> of the Mound Builders are largely unknown by the general public. I did> > not state that Archaeologists were unaware of this, I simply stated that> > the large majority of the population has no idea that they existed. I> have presented to thousands of people and always ask if anyone has ever> > heard of the Mound Builders and their creations; no more than a handful> has said yes. Despite the astounding engineering feats and widespread> > > construction of mind-boggling earthen pyramids and geometric forms> in Ancient America this is barely discussed in high school or college> > > education. The TED Board's assertion is a transparent attempt to> > portray me as lacking a basic understanding of Archaeological theory.2. This> > > statement is false. Actually, this helps prove my point that the> works of the Mound Builders are poorly understood, even by the experts .> The Mound Builders are well known for building with stone. There is> > > absolutely an archaeological consensus for this. The Adena ,> Hopewell and Fort Ancient cultures built massive stone wall complexes, stone> > > mounds and often stone temple chambers within earthen mounds. The> > Butler Co. site, Miami Co. site, Fort Hill, Spruce Hill and the Old Stone> > Fort at Tennessee are a few of the well known and universally accepted> > stone works of Ancient America. Spruce Hill was a 140 acre hilltop with a> > two and a quarter mile-long stone wall around the perimeter. A map of> the site is listed in the Smithsonian's 12th annual ethnology report by> > the respected Cyrus Thomas who also mapped the stone fort at Flint> ridge.> > > All this info can be seen in Norman Mueller's Glenford Stone Fort> and other Stone Constructions in Ohio and Beyond. From the History of> > Perry County Ohio 1902 is a description of the Adena stone hilltop> enclosure and stone burial mound. "Archeologists from all over the land have> > > visited here and the consensus of opinion is that the Glenford site> is> one of the most wonderful of fortifications....it is a fraction over> > 27 acres. It is made entirely of stone." Also from Gerard Fowke's> > > Antiquities of MO. 1902 pg 65, "So far as the ability to work in> stone is concerned, some stone chambers which exist in Pike County MO.> have been mentioned as examples of the skill of the Mound Builders in> this respect." Fowkes work is widely known and published in Smithsonian> > > Ethnology Reports. There is complete consensus within mainstream> > > archaeology that the Mound Builders built many structures of stone.> > > Looks like you might have to vet your experts a little better. 3. To> > > state to me that you cannot carbon date stone is insulting , clearly> > > only organic material such as charcoal and bone fragments can be> > > carbon dated. I in fact read a report in my talk from highly respected and> > > award winning Geochrom labs in Massachusetts about the Mystery Hill> > > site in New Hampshire. May 30th 1966 sample # GX-1608 submitted by Robert> > > Stone as given by Archaeologist Jim Whitall. Harold W. Kruger> > > technical director of Geochron states "you have found something very> interesting from this site with a rather old date of 2995 B.P." Kruger states> that there is a quite an adequate amount of material for dating. Date was> > > 2995 B.P. +/- 180 C-14 years. Whitall also excavated carbon remains> > from the Putney VT. stone chamber that yielded a date of 492 A.D. and> > > excavated one of the oldest burial mound sites in the country, the> > > Morrill Point site in Salisbury Ma. He found three human skeletons> and artifacts as well as conclusively proving a stone wall at the site> > > through carbon dating of layers of organic material is at least 900> > > years old. The Maritime Archaic site at Morrill Point proved to be> > 7500 years old and before Mr. Whitall passed away he was joined by Dr.> > Bruce Bourque and the highly regarded Dr. William Fitzhugh of the> > Smithsonian to make sure he received credit for his amazing discovery. The> L'Anse Amour stone burial mound in Labrador was expertly dated and> > universally recognized as being built 7500 years ago proving that stonework in> the northeast goes back at least this far. All this information is> readily available for anyone to see. I know a story about a bit of> > > pseudoscience. How about the Clovis Barrier, the crowning> achievement of Archaeology, rammed down our throat for 70 years now proven> > > incontrovertibly false. If you questioned this for years you were> > > considered a crank and a fool. Do you think a possible revaluation> > > of other theories that are riddled with unexplained anomalies may> happen soon. The only thing I ask for a fair and open discussion of> anomalies but the system always demonizes the one who points these out,> engages in personal attacks and a misdirection away from the evidence. Does> > anyone have Galileo's email address?4. I stated that some researchers> believe that the mound builder culture that started in Watson Brake La. in> > > roughly 3400 B.C. may have been influenced by contact with societies> > in the Yucatan or actual migrations northward by members of that> > > civilization. In fact there is conclusive proof of trade routes> > covering thousands of miles in Ancient America as evidence from artifact> finds at Hopewell sites in Illinois. Mississippian era earthen pyramid temple> > > building clearly resembles Mesoamerican stone pyramids and huge> plazas such as the one at Cahokia make it perfectly reasonable to assume a> > > possible, more southerly influence at some time. The geometry and> > > astronomical orientations of the Mound Builders are widely accepted-> > see Bradley Leper the curator of Archaeology at the Ohio Historical> > > Societies work and Lively and Horn's research on the Newark Octagon.5> > I, along with many other researchers who have written books on this> > > matter have collected thousands of accounts in town histories, NYT> > > articles, the Smithsonian's Ethnology reports, Scientific American> and American Antiquarian of giant skeletal remains being discovered.> Many of these with anatomic anomalies such as double rows of teeth. This> > occurs not just in 1840 but through decades of time and across thousands of> > > miles. The discoveries continued throughout the 1920's, 30's, 40's> and into the 60's. Don Dragoo was directly affiliated with the Carnegie> > > museum of Natural History from the years 1952-1977. He is considered> > the last of the great Adena scholars and by the end of his career was> > named curator of the Carnegie's Section of Anthropology. The following is> a quote from his Mounds for the Dead. "Two outstanding traits have> been noted repeatedly for this group. One is the protruding and massive> > chin often with prominent bilateral protrusions. (Webb and Snow, 1959 pg.> > > 37). The second is the large size of many of the males and some of> the females. A male of six feet was common and some individuals> > approaching seven feet have been found. Not only were these Adena people tall> but the massiveness of the bones indicates powerfully built individuals.> > The head was generally big with a large cranial capacity." Warren K.> > > Morehead the " Dean of American Archaeology" unearthed giant> skeletons in Illinois, Connecticut and Pennsylvania. I showed accounts of all> > > three in my presentation. At Tioga Point Pennsylvania. he uncovered> 68 skeletons averaging over 7 feet with many much larger, specimens> were sent to the American Investigating Museum where they were later> > reported stolen. Ralph Glidden working for the Heye Foundation unearthed> 3,781 skeletons averaging 7 feet with the largest 9 foot 2 inches on> > Catalina Island CA. I have numerous pictures of these finds including a> picture from the Santa Barbara museum in 1959 of these giant skeleton finds.> > > This is not a case of gigantism, countless accounts speak of dozens> of skeletons being uncovered, often with bizarre anatomic anomalies.> Alex Hrdlicka, the first head of the Smithsonian Division of Anthropology> > > starting in 1903 closed the door on the matter of giant skeletal> finds being reported. He guided the Smithsonian to attack and marginalize> > all this information but he could not erase the Smithsonian's own> > Ethnology reports so he claimed that "giants are no more" and that an> inability to measure correctly and understand human anatomy properly was the> reason why these things were previously reported. Hrdlicka believed in> > Pre-Nazi eugenics, thought no civilization existed in America before 4000> years ago and zealously attacked and intimidated anyone who challenged> these ideas- calling Louis Leaky a heretic to his face and destroying the> > > career of Warren K. Morehead. Hrdlicka is quoted in the Science News> > > Letter v13 #353 1928 p21 as claiming "the greatest danger before the> > > American people is the blending of the Negro tenth of the population> > > into the superior blood of the white race." In 1937 he published> > > findings in his Journal of Physical Anthropology to "prove that the> > > negro race is phylogenetically a closer approach to primitive man> than the white race." And just for good measure in 1927 endorsed findings> > > comparing African babies with young apes. Before Hrdlicka's reign> > there were no denials of giant skeleton finds. Hrdlicka along with many of> > his white supremacist colleagues at the Institution purged new evidence> > and marginalized and intimidated all who stood in the way of portraying> > the races of Ancient America as anything other than unsophisticated.> > Through cranial measurement Hrdlicka concluded that Native Americans along> > with African Americans were inferior to the white race. As geologist Kirk> > > Bryan told his students during the reign of Hrdrickla "if you ever> > find evidence of human life in a context which is ancient, bury it> > carefully but do not forget about it."(from The First American: A study of> North American Archaeology 1971.) Anthropologists and Archaeologists do> not recognize this phenomena, they are reading texts and scientific> > journals that have been censored of these accounts. Professionals read over> and over again about normal sized accounts and rightfully think the> whole thing is preposterous. I never claimed that all the Mound Builders> > were giants or that they were the architects of the mounds. I am simply> > > stating that there were thousands of giant skeletal remains> uncovered in Ancient America oftentimes in the burial mounds such as the Grave> > Creek mound in WV. From the Charleston Daily Mail October 22nd 1922,> > > "Archaeologists investigating the mound dug out a skeleton of a> > female. The skeleton was 7 foot 4 inches tall and the jawbone would easily> fit over the face of a man weighing 160 pounds. An 8 foot male skeleton> > was also found." Once again, this strange anatomic anomaly of a massive> > > jawbone like I found throughout the town histories of New England.6> I believe response 5 also answers 6, I will say however you mention> > > redditskeptic as a source of your investigation. The site> specializes in a series of ad hominem attacks, bad faith arguments, invisible> battles with straw men and personal insults. Essentially an endless stream> of infantile drivel, it is not a place for objective and open-minded> > > evaluation of evidence by anyone's standards. They continually> assail Deepak Chopra for scientifically unproven theories such as the> reality of "Chakras". By your new standards I suppose you will have to take> > down his talks also, he certainly endorses theories determined> > > pseudoscientific by professionals.7 Bones crumbling to dust is> > something to be found over and over again in the historical literature> including the Smithsonian's own Ethnology reports. I was reaching for words> such as mummification or preservation trying to theorize why some bones> > > crumbled to dust and others didn't. I was just trying to share that> > many remains were measured, examined often determined to have strange> > > anatomic anomalies before they crumbled to dust, some but by no> means all.8 Did the expert who visited the Smithsonian's museums support> > > center happen to make it over to the David H. Koch's Hall of Human> > > Origins permanent installation, where an interactive game tells us> > that in the future humans may adapt to climate change by "building> > > underground cities, growing short compact bodies with curved spines> to better move around in tight spaces." I am not talking about mermaids> > and Barnum and Bailey hoaxes, were there over one hundred mermaid> accounts from leading scientists of the time published in the New York Times?> I am talking about thousands of accounts from the likes of Moorehead,> > > Webb, Dragoo, Norris, other Anthropologists, Archaeologists,> > Professors, Doctors, Chief Justices and ordinary citizens. They were reporting> > what they saw before their own eyes not a discussion of their religious> and political beliefs. How do you tell someone who puts a skull over> their head, fits a jawbone over their face or reports double rows of teeth> > > that they don't understand human anatomy? Your reasons for pulling> my video are an attempt to portray me as an unsophisticated amateur> that was taken in by some grand hoax. What I did was read through a> series of town history, Smithsonian Ethnology and NYT reports. I was not> > > advocating a tricky, dangerous and unproven health cure but just> > trying to share interesting information from the leading and most respected> > > Scientific Journals and sources of the time. Any disinterested> > teenager can assemble a hundred of these accounts over a weekend with the> help of Google books. I have a large number of accounts that state that the> > > Smithsonian in fact received many of these giant skeletal remains.> So, why again was my video taken down? The bottom line is that I guess> > this is not an idea worth sharing because it reveals corruption and> > cover-ups at an institution whose misguided actions are open for anyone to see> > > with a little historical detective work. Not wanting to speak with> me or allow me to debate these reasons before removing the video is very> > > troubling. I would hope you would do me the professional courtesy of> > > whenever or wherever you list the reasons my talk was taken down you> > > also allow people to see my response. "When a well packaged web of> > lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth> will seem utterly preposterous and it's speaker a raving lunatic."> Dresden James. Thank you,James E. Vieira"> > >> >> http://www.facebook.com/pages/Stone-Builders-Mound-Builders-and-the-Giants-of-Ancient-America/556606251021542?ref=stream> > >> > > Susan English -- sent from my iPad> > >> >>

bigalemc2

Gumbo mentioned the REAL hoax of 20th century anthropology/archeology. The Clovis Barrier was a far bigger a hoax than Piltdown man or archeoraptor. It set

Message 7 of 10
, Dec 23, 2012

0 Attachment

Gumbo mentioned the REAL hoax of 20th century anthropology/archeology. The Clovis Barrier was a far bigger a hoax than Piltdown man or archeoraptor. It set back both fields in the Americas by 70 years. And there are still hard-headed academics who still argue its reality.

Clovis even hurts those fields more than seven decades, because they are still trying to fit older findings into a "Clovis was the MAIN incursion" meme, selling Clovis as still important.

But Clovis DIED OUT along with mammoths, at the beginning of the Younger-Dryas Stadial at 12.9 kya, and humans were all but missing from North America for 1,200 years after that. Thus, if ANY main incursion occurred it was more than a millennium after Clovis all died out. They all need to get their stories straight.

Steve Garcia

--- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "Rick O" wrote:>> Good call, Steve! One exception: Piltdown man was a 20th century event> (that has never been radio carbon dated to actually determine by> scientific method whether it was a hoax- it was "assessed" as a hoax).> And, yes, showmanship or newspaper sales are both possible motivations> in at least some of the accounts. However, many accounts, including the> one I investigated thoroughly, include the names of the discovers. In> the local case, I was able to verify that two of the folks named were> real and contemporary to the news item. One was the acting Justice of> the Peace at the time.> http://youtu.be/o-JFrKsasUU> > For a video account of the initial investigation> > > --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "bigalemc2" wrote:> >> > Susan -> > Steve Garcia here. I don't post comments here very often at all,> > because I don't have much to contribute. But there is at least one> > issue Vierira addresses that I will contend with. I think Vierira is> > pulling off a speculative hipshooting on the issue of the giants.> > Ed Grondine's book, "Man and Impact in the Americas" discusses the> > Indian accounts of the giants and giant skeletons found by settlers.> > They are sober accounts, with very little if any P.T. Barnum in any of> > them. Vierira is simply doing the arky 'sweep it under the carpet'> > hoping everyone will bow to his supposed expertise. But he shows he> > doesn't even know what he is talking about. Keep your eye on the pea.> > Vierira never talks about the giants in the areas where giants really> > did have remains found - with measurements in some cases.> > Vierira:You share newspaper clippings from the 19th century,> > including quotes from Abraham Lincoln, and claim they are evidence of> > giants. In fact, as one of our experts writes, "Skeletal hoaxes were> > common in the 19th century (e.g., Piltdown Man, the Cardiff Giant, and> > Barnum & Bailey Fiji mermaids [now at Harvard's Peabody Museum]). If> > (and this is a big if) the 8-foot skeleton is real, it could be a case> > of medical gigantism, but it is more likely a case of exaggeration."6.> > With respect to the theories of gigantism, the TEDx fact checkers> spoke> > to an expert who researched Middle Woodland and Mississippian skeletal> > collections at the Center for American Archaeology (CAA), based in> > Kampsville, IL, in 2007. The CAA is one of the largest repositories of> > excavated Woodland and Mississippian skeletal remains in the nation,> and> > their osteological collections are available for student and scholarly> > study. One expert stated "I can assure you that the archaeological> > Woodland and Mississippian populations were not giants. In some cases,> > one can observe a slight decrease in average height (a few> centimeters)> > with the transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture. This is> a> > trend that is observed in many cultures that undergo an agricultural> > transition, and is likely related to shorter nursing times and> increased> > early childhood grain consumption (maximum height is highly correlated> > to childhood protein consumption, so a high reliance on grain during> > childhood tends to result in shorter stature)."> > The first thing Vierira does is discount all the news accounts as> "19th> > century" as if that makes them written by a bunch of country bumpkins> > who wouldn't know a large skeleton from a tree.> > Then he makes another sweeping statement piling all the accounts into> > one pile - with P.T. Barnum (show biz and much later in the 19th> > century) and Piltdown Man (England). "Skeletal hoaxes were common in> > the 19th century" - what is wrong with this? It is a wave-of-the-hand> > generality that means nothing. My money says he did not put ONE> > second's effort into researching "the 19th century" (a generality in> > itself) and its scams - and then broadly includes the entire world in> > his entire 19th century. This is a common modern hubris in science -> > that people - even scientists - in earlier times were not as capable> as> > modern people to observe evidence clearly, thus that earlier evidence> > should be discounted. By this kind (Vierira) of "scientific review"> all> > the work of Maxwell, Faraday, Davy, Watt and thousands of other> > scientists can be included in the doubtful "19th century" scams. By> > associating these in his ill-informed under-the-rug move, he hopes to> > convince people that all 19th century evidence is unreliable - based> on> > nothing more than his say so. If I am not mistaken, Vierira never> > looked at ONE of the newspaper accounts himself - which is a> scientific> > strategy but a scientific scam, which goes, "I am the authority, so> > listen to everything I myself say and ignore anything I tell you to> > ignore." They do this without doing ONE bit of actual research on the> > specific subject.> > He even admits he has not looked at the evidence when he says, "If> (and> > this is a big if) the 8-foot skeleton is real." Then he really puolls> a> > boner, when he says, "it could be a case of medical gigantism." Why a> > boner? Because he is frankly admitting he is speculating (using the> > word "could"). He follow up that speculation with another: "but it is> > more likely a case of exaggeration." "More likely" means that he> again> > did not even look at the evidence, but is pulling this out of> > you-know-where - and expecting you the reader to just sit down, listen> > and shut up.> > In the following I will leave out the numerous other references to> > skeletons or skulls of enormous stature or size. I accept the word of> > the many common people from many locations far afield of each other,> and> > with no axe to grind, that when they say a skeleton is enormous or> > gigantic, they will be comparing the remains with their general> > experience and would not mention extraordinary size unless it was> > remarkable. :> > From Ed's book (p 117) "[]...the skeletons of eight persons...> measuring> > eight feet from head to toe. . . the leg bone extended six inches> above> > his knee." I will ask what some member of the Warren Commission asked> > about the autopsy of JFK: "Do you accept that the person was capable> of> > reading the numbers on a ruler"? (footnote available on request)> > (p 124) "[Ashtabula, OH] ...This land at one time was owned by Mr.> Peleg> > Sweet, who was a man of large size and full features; and it is> narrated> > that at one time he, in digging, came upon a skull and jaw which were> of> > such size that the skull would cover his head, and the jw could be> > easily slipped over his face, as though the head of the giant were> > enveloping his..."> > (p 127) "[Erie, PA] ...Amongst the skeletons was one of a giant, side> by> > side with a smaller one, probably his wife. The arm and legs of this> > [N]ative American Goliath were about one-half longer than those of the> > tallest man among the laborers; the skull was immensely large' the> lower> > jawbone easily slipped over the face and whiskers of a full faced> > man..."> > Ed has such accounts - footnoted - in several of his chapters, of what> > he calls the Copper Trading Giants, because they play a part over some> > time period, until they are killed off by other tribes.> > I recommend the book "Man and Impact in the Americas" both as good> > reading and as a reference. It is only available in soft cover, and> > only from Ed himself. See his listing at cosmictusk.com for how to> get> > a copy.> > Steve Garcia> > --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wrote:> > >> > > (Cal, i was stirred deeply by your last letter...recalled how lucky> i> > > was to have et you at a conference in Provo or Salt Lake City maybe> > > almost two decades ago)> > > Ancient Waterways friends. Happy Holidays!> > > Minnesota researcher Larry Furo sent an update today to another> group> > I> > > have great interest in. It is a lengthy, but sincere, well-written> > > letter and the latest word from Ashfield, Massachuetts stonemason,> > James> > > Vieira who has been mentioned at AWS before by some of you, though i> > > think his last name at our site was spelled incorrectly. At least> two> > > members know him personally and have expressed great respect for> him.> > > Again, a broad subject and lengthy letter from him. But I and many> > here> > > and diffusionists as well as many academics as well have long held> > much> > > interest and may find it well worth stepping further into the> diligent> > > efforts of James Vierira.> > > First, a somewhat random link about him first (i fell on blue ice> > > covered with right inches of snow in a blizzard this AM trying to> pick> > > up a Christmas tree before my children from three states come north> > for> > > our weekend holiday celebration. I hurt my neck something fierce,> > > waived off an ambulance and cannot linger long here). Next, i hope> > will> > > follow his most recent public letter he posted at his Facebook page> > > under this title: Stone Builders, Mound Builders and the Giants of> > > Ancient America | Jim Vieira> > >> >> http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2012/12/stone-builders-mound-builde\> \> > \> > > rs-and-the-giants-of-ancient-america-jim-vieira-2506330.html> > > > ers-and-the-giants-of-ancient-america-jim-vieira-2506330.html>> > > Scanned, for those not signed into FB, from James E. Vieira, his> > > response to recent censorship, etc.:> > > "After 120,000 views, the #1 most watched tedx video in the world> > during> > > the month it was up, my talk has been removed. I am posting the> resons> > > given and my response. A long but interesting read about how> > censorship> > > can happen. Thanks JimAt 2:03 -- You claim: "These structures are so> > > staggering that people don't even think they exist still." In> > > fact, there is a general archaeological consensus about the> impressive> > > civilization demonstrated by the moundbuilders in Cahokia and> similar> > > sites.2. At 4:05 -- You claim: "The moundbuilders who built all> > > kinds of structures." All evidence for the moundbuilders'> > > architecture suggests that they built with sod packets and wood.3.> At> > > 4:19 -- You mention carbon-dating but do not specify what was> > > carbon-dated. You cannot carbon-date stone. Again at 6:00.4. At 7:26> > --> > > You mention Mayan theories. Since the recent deciphering of almost> the> > > full Mayan script, the astronomical preoccupation attributed to> Mayan> > > writings has been largely discredited. Most of the numbers found in> > the> > > Mayan script are now believed to be dates of births, coronations and> > > wars.5. At 9:15 -- You share newspaper clippings from the 19th> > century,> > > including quotes from Abraham Lincoln, and claim they are evidence> of> > > giants. In fact, as one of our experts writes, "Skeletal hoaxes were> > > common in the 19th century (e.g., Piltdown Man, the Cardiff Giant,> and> > > Barnum & Bailey Fiji mermaids [now at Harvard's Peabody Museum]). If> > > (and this is a big if) the 8-foot skeleton is real, it could be a> case> > > of medical gigantism, but it is more likely a case of> exaggeration."6.> > > With respect to the theories of gigantism, the TEDx fact checkers> > spoke> > > to an expert who researched Middle Woodland and Mississippian> skeletal> > > collections at the Center for American Archaeology (CAA), based in> > > Kampsville, IL, in 2007. The CAA is one of the largest repositories> of> > > excavated Woodland and Mississippian skeletal remains in the nation,> > and> > > their osteological collections are available for student and> scholarly> > > study. One expert stated "I can assure you that the archaeological> > > Woodland and Mississippian populations were not giants. In some> cases,> > > one can observe a slight decrease in average height (a few> > centimeters)> > > with the transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture. This> is> > a> > > trend that is observed in many cultures that undergo an agricultural> > > transition, and is likely related to shorter nursing times and> > increased> > > early childhood grain consumption (maximum height is highly> correlated> > > to childhood protein consumption, so a high reliance on grain during> > > childhood tends to result in shorter stature)."7. At 12:49 -- "Bones> > > crumbled away because they weren't mummified." Skeletal> > > preservation and mummification are unrelated processes. Plenty of> > > skeletons survive in New England, and the disappearance of any and> all> > > skeletons that could lend evidence to these claims today is highly> > > suspect.8. With respect to repeated claims that the Smithsonian is> > > hiding or covering up evidence, the fact checkers also heard this,> as> > > well: "In 2007 I was a visiting scientist at the Smithsonian Museum> > > Support Center, and while it is full of amazing and bizarre material> > > (e.g., an entire herd of elephants that Teddy Roosevelt shot> occupies> > > one floor), there is no conspiracy to cover up or hide Native> American> > > giant skeletons or artifacts. Like most museums, the Smithsonian> > > displays less than 1% of its collections at any given time, meaning> > that> > > a lot of material spends decades (or sadly centuries) in its vaults> > > awaiting exhibition. We can debate whether or not this is> responsible> > > stewardship (a debate that would also have to include a discussion> of> > > the chronic underfunding of public museums and the economics of> public> > > education), but to portray the Smithsonian today as part of some> sort> > of> > > a conspiracy of `misinformation and corruption' to cover up> > > Native American history by hiding giant moundbuilder skeletons> > excavated> > > in the 19th century is ridiculous. Smithsonian physical> > anthropologists> > > have published an impressive body of literature on the analysis of> > their> > > collections."I am writing to respond to the stated reasons why my> TEDX> > > talk was removed. 1. My assertion is that the staggering structures> of> > > the Mound Builders are largely unknown by the general public. I did> > not> > > state that Archaeologists were unaware of this, I simply stated that> > the> > > large majority of the population has no idea that they existed. I> have> > > presented to thousands of people and always ask if anyone has ever> > heard> > > of the Mound Builders and their creations; no more than a handful> has> > > said yes. Despite the astounding engineering feats and widespread> > > construction of mind-boggling earthen pyramids and geometric forms> in> > > Ancient America this is barely discussed in high school or college> > > education. The TED Board's assertion is a transparent attempt to> > portray> > > me as lacking a basic understanding of Archaeological theory.2. This> > > statement is false. Actually, this helps prove my point that the> works> > > of the Mound Builders are poorly understood, even by the experts .> The> > > Mound Builders are well known for building with stone. There is> > > absolutely an archaeological consensus for this. The Adena ,> Hopewell> > > and Fort Ancient cultures built massive stone wall complexes, stone> > > mounds and often stone temple chambers within earthen mounds. The> > Butler> > > Co. site, Miami Co. site, Fort Hill, Spruce Hill and the Old Stone> > Fort> > > at Tennessee are a few of the well known and universally accepted> > stone> > > works of Ancient America. Spruce Hill was a 140 acre hilltop with a> > two> > > and a quarter mile-long stone wall around the perimeter. A map of> the> > > site is listed in the Smithsonian's 12th annual ethnology report by> > the> > > respected Cyrus Thomas who also mapped the stone fort at Flint> ridge.> > > All this info can be seen in Norman Mueller's Glenford Stone Fort> and> > > other Stone Constructions in Ohio and Beyond. From the History of> > Perry> > > County Ohio 1902 is a description of the Adena stone hilltop> enclosure> > > and stone burial mound. "Archeologists from all over the land have> > > visited here and the consensus of opinion is that the Glenford site> is> > > one of the most wonderful of fortifications....it is a fraction over> > 27> > > acres. It is made entirely of stone." Also from Gerard Fowke's> > > Antiquities of MO. 1902 pg 65, "So far as the ability to work in> stone> > > is concerned, some stone chambers which exist in Pike County MO.> have> > > been mentioned as examples of the skill of the Mound Builders in> this> > > respect." Fowkes work is widely known and published in Smithsonian> > > Ethnology Reports. There is complete consensus within mainstream> > > archaeology that the Mound Builders built many structures of stone.> > > Looks like you might have to vet your experts a little better. 3. To> > > state to me that you cannot carbon date stone is insulting , clearly> > > only organic material such as charcoal and bone fragments can be> > carbon> > > dated. I in fact read a report in my talk from highly respected and> > > award winning Geochrom labs in Massachusetts about the Mystery Hill> > site> > > in New Hampshire. May 30th 1966 sample # GX-1608 submitted by Robert> > > Stone as given by Archaeologist Jim Whitall. Harold W. Kruger> > technical> > > director of Geochron states "you have found something very> interesting> > > from this site with a rather old date of 2995 B.P." Kruger states> that> > > there is a quite an adequate amount of material for dating. Date was> > > 2995 B.P. +/- 180 C-14 years. Whitall also excavated carbon remains> > from> > > the Putney VT. stone chamber that yielded a date of 492 A.D. and> > > excavated one of the oldest burial mound sites in the country, the> > > Morrill Point site in Salisbury Ma. He found three human skeletons> and> > > artifacts as well as conclusively proving a stone wall at the site> > > through carbon dating of layers of organic material is at least 900> > > years old. The Maritime Archaic site at Morrill Point proved to be> > 7500> > > years old and before Mr. Whitall passed away he was joined by Dr.> > Bruce> > > Bourque and the highly regarded Dr. William Fitzhugh of the> > Smithsonian> > > to make sure he received credit for his amazing discovery. The> L'Anse> > > Amour stone burial mound in Labrador was expertly dated and> > universally> > > recognized as being built 7500 years ago proving that stonework in> the> > > northeast goes back at least this far. All this information is> readily> > > available for anyone to see. I know a story about a bit of> > > pseudoscience. How about the Clovis Barrier, the crowning> achievement> > of> > > Archaeology, rammed down our throat for 70 years now proven> > > incontrovertibly false. If you questioned this for years you were> > > considered a crank and a fool. Do you think a possible revaluation> of> > > other theories that are riddled with unexplained anomalies may> happen> > > soon. The only thing I ask for a fair and open discussion of> anomalies> > > but the system always demonizes the one who points these out,> engages> > in> > > personal attacks and a misdirection away from the evidence. Does> > anyone> > > have Galileo's email address?4. I stated that some researchers> believe> > > that the mound builder culture that started in Watson Brake La. in> > > roughly 3400 B.C. may have been influenced by contact with societies> > in> > > the Yucatan or actual migrations northward by members of that> > > civilization. In fact there is conclusive proof of trade routes> > covering> > > thousands of miles in Ancient America as evidence from artifact> finds> > at> > > Hopewell sites in Illinois. Mississippian era earthen pyramid temple> > > building clearly resembles Mesoamerican stone pyramids and huge> plazas> > > such as the one at Cahokia make it perfectly reasonable to assume a> > > possible, more southerly influence at some time. The geometry and> > > astronomical orientations of the Mound Builders are widely accepted-> > see> > > Bradley Leper the curator of Archaeology at the Ohio Historical> > > Societies work and Lively and Horn's research on the Newark Octagon.> > 5.> > > I, along with many other researchers who have written books on this> > > matter have collected thousands of accounts in town histories, NYT> > > articles, the Smithsonian's Ethnology reports, Scientific American> and> > > American Antiquarian of giant skeletal remains being discovered.> Many> > of> > > these with anatomic anomalies such as double rows of teeth. This> > occurs> > > not just in 1840 but through decades of time and across thousands of> > > miles. The discoveries continued throughout the 1920's, 30's, 40's> and> > > into the 60's. Don Dragoo was directly affiliated with the Carnegie> > > museum of Natural History from the years 1952-1977. He is considered> > the> > > last of the great Adena scholars and by the end of his career was> > named> > > curator of the Carnegie's Section of Anthropology. The following is> a> > > quote from his Mounds for the Dead. "Two outstanding traits have> been> > > noted repeatedly for this group. One is the protruding and massive> > chin> > > often with prominent bilateral protrusions. (Webb and Snow, 1959 pg.> > > 37). The second is the large size of many of the males and some of> the> > > females. A male of six feet was common and some individuals> > approaching> > > seven feet have been found. Not only were these Adena people tall> but> > > the massiveness of the bones indicates powerfully built individuals.> > The> > > head was generally big with a large cranial capacity." Warren K.> > > Morehead the " Dean of American Archaeology" unearthed giant> skeletons> > > in Illinois, Connecticut and Pennsylvania. I showed accounts of all> > > three in my presentation. At Tioga Point Pennsylvania. he uncovered> 68> > > skeletons averaging over 7 feet with many much larger, specimens> were> > > sent to the American Investigating Museum where they were later> > reported> > > stolen. Ralph Glidden working for the Heye Foundation unearthed> 3,781> > > skeletons averaging 7 feet with the largest 9 foot 2 inches on> > Catalina> > > Island CA. I have numerous pictures of these finds including a> picture> > > from the Santa Barbara museum in 1959 of these giant skeleton finds.> > > This is not a case of gigantism, countless accounts speak of dozens> of> > > skeletons being uncovered, often with bizarre anatomic anomalies.> Alex> > > Hrdlicka, the first head of the Smithsonian Division of Anthropology> > > starting in 1903 closed the door on the matter of giant skeletal> finds> > > being reported. He guided the Smithsonian to attack and marginalize> > all> > > this information but he could not erase the Smithsonian's own> > Ethnology> > > reports so he claimed that "giants are no more" and that an> inability> > to> > > measure correctly and understand human anatomy properly was the> reason> > > why these things were previously reported. Hrdlicka believed in> > Pre-Nazi> > > eugenics, thought no civilization existed in America before 4000> years> > > ago and zealously attacked and intimidated anyone who challenged> these> > > ideas- calling Louis Leaky a heretic to his face and destroying the> > > career of Warren K. Morehead. Hrdlicka is quoted in the Science News> > > Letter v13 #353 1928 p21 as claiming "the greatest danger before the> > > American people is the blending of the Negro tenth of the population> > > into the superior blood of the white race." In 1937 he published> > > findings in his Journal of Physical Anthropology to "prove that the> > > negro race is phylogenetically a closer approach to primitive man> than> > > the white race." And just for good measure in 1927 endorsed findings> > > comparing African babies with young apes. Before Hrdlicka's reign> > there> > > were no denials of giant skeleton finds. Hrdlicka along with many of> > his> > > white supremacist colleagues at the Institution purged new evidence> > and> > > marginalized and intimidated all who stood in the way of portraying> > the> > > races of Ancient America as anything other than unsophisticated.> > Through> > > cranial measurement Hrdlicka concluded that Native Americans along> > with> > > African Americans were inferior to the white race. As geologist Kirk> > > Bryan told his students during the reign of Hrdrickla "if you ever> > find> > > evidence of human life in a context which is ancient, bury it> > carefully> > > but do not forget about it."(from The First American: A study of> North> > > American Archaeology 1971.) Anthropologists and Archaeologists do> not> > > recognize this phenomena, they are reading texts and scientific> > journals> > > that have been censored of these accounts. Professionals read over> and> > > over again about normal sized accounts and rightfully think the> whole> > > thing is preposterous. I never claimed that all the Mound Builders> > were> > > giants or that they were the architects of the mounds. I am simply> > > stating that there were thousands of giant skeletal remains> uncovered> > in> > > Ancient America oftentimes in the burial mounds such as the Grave> > Creek> > > mound in WV. From the Charleston Daily Mail October 22nd 1922,> > > "Archaeologists investigating the mound dug out a skeleton of a> > female.> > > The skeleton was 7 foot 4 inches tall and the jawbone would easily> fit> > > over the face of a man weighing 160 pounds. An 8 foot male skeleton> > was> > > also found." Once again, this strange anatomic anomaly of a massive> > > jawbone like I found throughout the town histories of New England.6> I> > > believe response 5 also answers 6, I will say however you mention> > > redditskeptic as a source of your investigation. The site> specializes> > in> > > a series of ad hominem attacks, bad faith arguments, invisible> battles> > > with straw men and personal insults. Essentially an endless stream> of> > > infantile drivel, it is not a place for objective and open-minded> > > evaluation of evidence by anyone's standards. They continually> assail> > > Deepak Chopra for scientifically unproven theories such as the> reality> > > of "Chakras". By your new standards I suppose you will have to take> > down> > > his talks also, he certainly endorses theories determined> > > pseudoscientific by professionals.7 Bones crumbling to dust is> > something> > > to be found over and over again in the historical literature> including> > > the Smithsonian's own Ethnology reports. I was reaching for words> such> > > as mummification or preservation trying to theorize why some bones> > > crumbled to dust and others didn't. I was just trying to share that> > many> > > remains were measured, examined often determined to have strange> > > anatomic anomalies before they crumbled to dust, some but by no> means> > > all.8 Did the expert who visited the Smithsonian's museums support> > > center happen to make it over to the David H. Koch's Hall of Human> > > Origins permanent installation, where an interactive game tells us> > that> > > in the future humans may adapt to climate change by "building> > > underground cities, growing short compact bodies with curved spines> to> > > better move around in tight spaces." I am not talking about mermaids> > and> > > Barnum and Bailey hoaxes, were there over one hundred mermaid> accounts> > > from leading scientists of the time published in the New York Times?> I> > > am talking about thousands of accounts from the likes of Moorehead,> > > Webb, Dragoo, Norris, other Anthropologists, Archaeologists,> > Professors,> > > Doctors, Chief Justices and ordinary citizens. They were reporting> > what> > > they saw before their own eyes not a discussion of their religious> and> > > political beliefs. How do you tell someone who puts a skull over> their> > > head, fits a jawbone over their face or reports double rows of teeth> > > that they don't understand human anatomy? Your reasons for pulling> my> > > video are an attempt to portray me as an unsophisticated amateur> that> > > was taken in by some grand hoax. What I did was read through a> series> > of> > > town history, Smithsonian Ethnology and NYT reports. I was not> > > advocating a tricky, dangerous and unproven health cure but just> > trying> > > to share interesting information from the leading and most respected> > > Scientific Journals and sources of the time. Any disinterested> > teenager> > > can assemble a hundred of these accounts over a weekend with the> help> > of> > > Google books. I have a large number of accounts that state that the> > > Smithsonian in fact received many of these giant skeletal remains.> So,> > > why again was my video taken down? The bottom line is that I guess> > this> > > is not an idea worth sharing because it reveals corruption and> > cover-ups> > > at an institution whose misguided actions are open for anyone to see> > > with a little historical detective work. Not wanting to speak with> me> > or> > > allow me to debate these reasons before removing the video is very> > > troubling. I would hope you would do me the professional courtesy of> > > whenever or wherever you list the reasons my talk was taken down you> > > also allow people to see my response. "When a well packaged web of> > lies> > > has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth> will> > > seem utterly preposterous and it's speaker a raving lunatic."> Dresden> > > James. Thank you,James E. Vieira"> > >> >> http://www.facebook.com/pages/Stone-Builders-Mound-Builders-and-the-Gian\> \> > \> > > ts-of-Ancient-America/556606251021542?ref=stream> > >> > > Susan English -- sent from my iPad> > >> >>

bigalemc2

Perhaps the proper term for Clovis is Clovis Interruptus. Seriously. Steve Garcia ... And ... from ... They

Message 8 of 10
, Dec 23, 2012

0 Attachment

Perhaps the proper term for Clovis is "Clovis Interruptus." Seriously.

Steve Garcia

--- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "bigalemc2" wrote:>> Gumbo mentioned the REAL hoax of 20th century anthropology/archeology. > The Clovis Barrier was a far bigger a hoax than Piltdown man or> archeoraptor. It set back both fields in the Americas by 70 years. And> there are still hard-headed academics who still argue its reality.> Clovis even hurts those fields more than seven decades, because they> are still trying to fit older findings into a "Clovis was the MAIN> incursion" meme, selling Clovis as still important.> But Clovis DIED OUT along with mammoths, at the beginning of the> Younger-Dryas Stadial at 12.9 kya, and humans were all but missing from> North America for 1,200 years after that. Thus, if ANY main incursion> occurred it was more than a millennium after Clovis all died out. They> all need to get their stories straight.> Steve Garcia>

--- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "bigalemc2" wrote:>> Note to all:> I received the following in an email. I trust I have permission to> paste it in here:On 12/22/2012 3:35 PM, Gumba wrote:> With all due respect Mr. Garcia, I believe you may have mis-read what> Jim Vieira has said. The quotations you cite, are actually Stacy> Kontrabecki from the TEDx venue. She was asked to remove the TEDx talk> Jim Vieira gave in November, after archaeologists and the Smithsonian> were furious about his presentation. > http://tedxshelburnefalls.wordpress.com/2012/12/14/jim-vieiras-talk-remo\> ved-from-internet/> > oved-from-internet/> Jim has compiled thousands of accounts of giant> skeleton discoveries, sober accounts and written records in News papers,> historical journals, and the Smithsonian ethnology reports. This is the> video which TEDx removed, after it had become viral in 2 weeks, getting> 120,000 views. Luckily someone re-uploaded it for the third time. TEDx> is actively hunting down and deleting any re-uploads of the video,> citing copyright violations. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_FSmvBgHUc> The cover-up of this> information is in full swing. Jim was recently on Coast to Coast AM> radio with George Noory discussing the reports of gigantic Indians,> skeletons, and stone and mound structures and the Smithsonian cover-ups> under Ales Hrdlicka which continues to this day. J.S. I apologize to> Viera (spelling included - I still am not sure of the spelling, but> think it is "Viera"). If this was from Stacy Kontrabecki, I still can't> find that name in there, but accept that Gumbo is correct.> So, those reading my long comment should replace Viera's name with> Kontrabecki's name.> I completely agree with anyone who shakes his/her head at the Nazi> tactics of Hrdlicka, the biggest jaggoff in the history of anthropology,> and one who has injured it immensely and set it back/held it back by> many decades. His dictatorial thinking and actions have blocked so much> and cost USA anthropology so many thousands of valid artifacts which> have - because of him, specifically, and his book-burner-like followers> - not been preserved and are now lost forever.> Hopefully the true history can overcome the Hrdlicka Affect and still be> reconstructed.> Steve Garcia> P.S. ---- Rick O., yes, Piltdown has NEVER been - and never will, now> - be forensically proven one way or another. And I did not remember it> was after 1900, so thanks for that.> ....From the sober tone of the articles I've seen quoted, I cannot> credit any broad generalizations of 'hoax' in 19th century accounts. > Mention in news articles is not exactly a way of making money. America> has always had many entrepreneurs who have tried many 'come-ons' - but> being mentioned in news articles is not a superhighway to riches. Most> come-ons I have ever seen or heard of have been roadside signs and> cheesy displays in ramshackle stands - that earn meager incomes not> worth much.> But to glomp ALL mentions of giant skeletons/skulls from ALL locations> in several states over several decades makes the accuser look dumber> than George W Bush and more tinfoil than UFOs. For academics to adopt> that position is farcical. The real hoax is theirs, in the end.> > --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "Rick O" wrote:> >> > Good call, Steve! One exception: Piltdown man was a 20th century event> > (that has never been radio carbon dated to actually determine by> > scientific method whether it was a hoax- it was "assessed" as a hoax).> > And, yes, showmanship or newspaper sales are both possible motivations> > in at least some of the accounts. However, many accounts, including> the> > one I investigated thoroughly, include the names of the discovers. In> > the local case, I was able to verify that two of the folks named were> > real and contemporary to the news item. One was the acting Justice of> > the Peace at the time.> > http://youtu.be/o-JFrKsasUU> >> > For a video account of the initial investigation> >> >> > --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "bigalemc2" wrote:> > >> > > Susan -> > > Steve Garcia here. I don't post comments here very often at all,> > > because I don't have much to contribute. But there is at least one> > > issue Vierira addresses that I will contend with. I think Vierira> is> > > pulling off a speculative hipshooting on the issue of the giants.> > > Ed Grondine's book, "Man and Impact in the Americas" discusses the> > > Indian accounts of the giants and giant skeletons found by settlers.> > > They are sober accounts, with very little if any P.T. Barnum in any> of> > > them. Vierira is simply doing the arky 'sweep it under the carpet'> > > hoping everyone will bow to his supposed expertise. But he shows he> > > doesn't even know what he is talking about. Keep your eye on the> pea.> > > Vierira never talks about the giants in the areas where giants> really> > > did have remains found - with measurements in some cases.> > > Vierira:You share newspaper clippings from the 19th century,> > > including quotes from Abraham Lincoln, and claim they are evidence> of> > > giants. In fact, as one of our experts writes, "Skeletal hoaxes were> > > common in the 19th century (e.g., Piltdown Man, the Cardiff Giant,> and> > > Barnum & Bailey Fiji mermaids [now at Harvard's Peabody Museum]). If> > > (and this is a big if) the 8-foot skeleton is real, it could be a> case> > > of medical gigantism, but it is more likely a case of> exaggeration."6.> > > With respect to the theories of gigantism, the TEDx fact checkers> > spoke to an expert who researched Middle Woodland and Mississippian> skeletal> > > collections at the Center for American Archaeology (CAA), based in> > > Kampsville, IL, in 2007. The CAA is one of the largest repositories> of> > > excavated Woodland and Mississippian skeletal remains in the nation,> > and their osteological collections are available for student and> scholarly> > > study. One expert stated "I can assure you that the archaeological> > > Woodland and Mississippian populations were not giants. In some> cases,> > > one can observe a slight decrease in average height (a few> > centimeters)> > > with the transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture. This> is> > a trend that is observed in many cultures that undergo an agricultural> > > transition, and is likely related to shorter nursing times and> > increased early childhood grain consumption (maximum height is highly> correlated> > > to childhood protein consumption, so a high reliance on grain during> > > childhood tends to result in shorter stature)."> > > The first thing Vierira does is discount all the news accounts as> > "19th century" as if that makes them written by a bunch of country> bumpkins> > > who wouldn't know a large skeleton from a tree.> > > Then he makes another sweeping statement piling all the accounts> into> > > one pile - with P.T. Barnum (show biz and much later in the 19th> > > century) and Piltdown Man (England). "Skeletal hoaxes were common> in> > > the 19th century" - what is wrong with this? It is a> wave-of-the-hand> > > generality that means nothing. My money says he did not put ONE> > > second's effort into researching "the 19th century" (a generality in> > > itself) and its scams - and then broadly includes the entire world> in> > > his entire 19th century. This is a common modern hubris in science> -> > > that people - even scientists - in earlier times were not as capable> > as modern people to observe evidence clearly, thus that earlier> evidence> > > should be discounted. By this kind (Vierira) of "scientific review"> > all the work of Maxwell, Faraday, Davy, Watt and thousands of other> > > scientists can be included in the doubtful "19th century" scams. By> > > associating these in his ill-informed under-the-rug move, he hopes> to> > > convince people that all 19th century evidence is unreliable - based> > on nothing more than his say so. If I am not mistaken, Vierira never> > > looked at ONE of the newspaper accounts himself - which is a> > scientific strategy but a scientific scam, which goes, "I am the> authority, so> > > listen to everything I myself say and ignore anything I tell you to> > > ignore." They do this without doing ONE bit of actual research on> the> > > specific subject.> > > He even admits he has not looked at the evidence when he says, "If> > (and this is a big if) the 8-foot skeleton is real." Then he really> pulls> > a boner, when he says, "it could be a case of medical gigantism." Why> a> > > boner? Because he is frankly admitting he is speculating (using the> > > word "could"). He follows up that speculation with another: "but it> is> > > more likely a case of exaggeration." "More likely" means that he> > again did not even look at the evidence, but is pulling this out of> > > you-know-where - and expecting you the reader to just sit down,> listen> > > and shut up.> > > In the following I will leave out the numerous other references> to> > > skeletons or skulls of enormous stature or size. I accept the word> of> > > the many common people from many locations far afield of each other,> > and with no axe to grind, that when they say a skeleton is enormous or> > > gigantic, they will be comparing the remains with their general> > > experience and would not mention extraordinary size unless it was> > > remarkable. :> > > From Ed's book (p 117) "[]...the skeletons of eight persons...> > measuring eight feet from head to toe. . . the leg bone extended six> inches> > above his knee." I will ask what some member of the Warren Commission> asked> > > about the autopsy of JFK: "Do you accept that the person was capable> > of reading the numbers on a ruler"? (footnote available on request)> > > (p 124) "[Ashtabula, OH] ...This land at one time was owned by Mr.> > Peleg Sweet, who was a man of large size and full features; and it is> > narrated that at one time he, in digging, came upon a skull and jaw> which were> > of such size that the skull would cover his head, and the jaw could be> > > easily slipped over his face, as though the head of the giant were> > > enveloping his..."> > > (p 127) "[Erie, PA] ...Amongst the skeletons was one of a giant,> side> > by side with a smaller one, probably his wife. The arm and legs of> this> > > [N]ative American Goliath were about one-half longer than those of> the> > > tallest man among the laborers; the skull was immensely large' the> > lower jawbone easily slipped over the face and whiskers of a full> faced man..."> > > Ed has such accounts - footnoted - in several of his chapters, of> what> > > he calls the Copper Trading Giants, because they play a part over> some> > > time period, until they are killed off by other tribes.> > > I recommend the book "Man and Impact in the Americas" both as good> > > reading and as a reference. It is only available in soft cover, and> > > only from Ed himself. See his listing at cosmictusk.com for how to> > get a copy.> > > Steve Garcia> > > --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wrote:> > > >> > > > (Cal, i was stirred deeply by your last letter...recalled how> lucky> > > > I was to have met you at a conference in Provo or Salt Lake City> maybe> > > > almost two decades ago)> > > > Ancient Waterways friends. Happy Holidays!> > > > Minnesota researcher Larry Furo sent an update today to another> > group I have great interest in. It is a lengthy, but sincere,> well-written> > > > letter and the latest word from Ashfield, Massachuetts stonemason,> > > James Vieira who has been mentioned at AWS before by some of you,> though i> > > > think his last name at our site was spelled incorrectly. At least> > two members know him personally and have expressed great respect for> > him. Again, a broad subject and lengthy letter from him. But I and> many> > > here and diffusionists as well as many academics as well have long> held> > > much interest and may find it well worth stepping further into the> > diligent efforts of James Vierira.> > > > First, a somewhat random link about him first (i fell on blue ice> > > > covered with right inches of snow in a blizzard this AM trying to> > pick up a Christmas tree before my children from three states come> north> > > for our weekend holiday celebration. I hurt my neck something> fierce,> > > > waived off an ambulance and cannot linger long here). Next, i hope> > > will follow his most recent public letter he posted at his Facebook> page> > > > under this title: Stone Builders, Mound Builders and the Giants> of> > > > Ancient America | Jim Vieira> > > >> > >> >> http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2012/12/stone-builders-mound-builde\> rs-and-the-giants-of-ancient-america-jim-vieira-2506330.html> > > >> > > > Scanned, for those not signed into FB, from James E. Vieira, his> > > > response to recent censorship, etc.:> > > > "After 120,000 views, the #1 most watched tedx video in the world> > > during the month it was up, my talk has been removed. I am posting> the> > resons given and my response. A long but interesting read about how> > > censorship can happen. Thanks JimAt 2:03 -- You claim: "These> structures are so> > > > staggering that people don't even think they exist still." In> > > > fact, there is a general archaeological consensus about the> > impressive civilization demonstrated by the moundbuilders in Cahokia> and> > similar sites.2. At 4:05 -- You claim: "The moundbuilders who built> all> > > > kinds of structures." All evidence for the moundbuilders'> > > > architecture suggests that they built with sod packets and wood.3.> > At 4:19 -- You mention carbon-dating but do not specify what was> > > > carbon-dated. You cannot carbon-date stone. Again at 6:00.4. At> 7:26> > > -- You mention Mayan theories. Since the recent deciphering of> almost> > the full Mayan script, the astronomical preoccupation attributed to> > Mayan writings has been largely discredited. Most of the numbers found> in> > > the Mayan script are now believed to be dates of births, coronations> and> > > > wars.5. At 9:15 -- You share newspaper clippings from the 19th> > > century, including quotes from Abraham Lincoln, and claim they are> evidence> > of giants. In fact, as one of our experts writes, "Skeletal hoaxes> were> > > > common in the 19th century (e.g., Piltdown Man, the Cardiff Giant,> > and Barnum & Bailey Fiji mermaids [now at Harvard's Peabody Museum]).> If> > > > (and this is a big if) the 8-foot skeleton is real, it could be a> > case of medical gigantism, but it is more likely a case of> > exaggeration."6. With respect to the theories of gigantism, the TEDx> fact checkers> > > spoke to an expert who researched Middle Woodland and Mississippian> > skeletal collections at the Center for American Archaeology (CAA),> based in> > > > Kampsville, IL, in 2007. The CAA is one of the largest> repositories> > of excavated Woodland and Mississippian skeletal remains in the> nation,> > > and their osteological collections are available for student and> > scholarly study. One expert stated "I can assure you that the> archaeological> > > > Woodland and Mississippian populations were not giants. In some> > cases, one can observe a slight decrease in average height (a few> > > centimeters) with the transition from hunting and gathering to> agriculture. This> > is a trend that is observed in many cultures that undergo an> agricultural> > > > transition, and is likely related to shorter nursing times and> > > increased early childhood grain consumption (maximum height is> highly> > correlated to childhood protein consumption, so a high reliance on> grain during> > > > childhood tends to result in shorter stature)."7. At 12:49 --> "Bones> > > > crumbled away because they weren't mummified." Skeletal> > > > preservation and mummification are unrelated processes. Plenty of> > > > skeletons survive in New England, and the disappearance of any and> > all skeletons that could lend evidence to these claims today is highly> > > > suspect.8. With respect to repeated claims that the Smithsonian is> > > > hiding or covering up evidence, the fact checkers also heard this,> > as well: "In 2007 I was a visiting scientist at the Smithsonian Museum> > > > Support Center, and while it is full of amazing and bizarre> material> > > > (e.g., an entire herd of elephants that Teddy Roosevelt shot> > occupies one floor), there is no conspiracy to cover up or hide Native> > American giant skeletons or artifacts. Like most museums, the> Smithsonian> > > > displays less than 1% of its collections at any given time,> meaning> > > that a lot of material spends decades (or sadly centuries) in its> vaults> > > > awaiting exhibition. We can debate whether or not this is> > responsible stewardship (a debate that would also have to include a> discussion> > of the chronic underfunding of public museums and the economics of> > public education), but to portray the Smithsonian today as part of> some> > sort of a conspiracy of `misinformation and corruption' to cover up> > > > Native American history by hiding giant moundbuilder skeletons> > > excavated in the 19th century is ridiculous. Smithsonian physical> > > anthropologists have published an impressive body of literature on> the analysis of> > > their collections."I am writing to respond to the stated reasons why> my> > TEDX talk was removed. 1. My assertion is that the staggering> structures> > of the Mound Builders are largely unknown by the general public. I did> > > not state that Archaeologists were unaware of this, I simply stated> that> > > the large majority of the population has no idea that they existed.> I> > have presented to thousands of people and always ask if anyone has> ever> > > heard of the Mound Builders and their creations; no more than a> handful> > has said yes. Despite the astounding engineering feats and widespread> > > > construction of mind-boggling earthen pyramids and geometric forms> > in Ancient America this is barely discussed in high school or college> > > > education. The TED Board's assertion is a transparent attempt to> > > portray me as lacking a basic understanding of Archaeological> theory.2. This> > > > statement is false. Actually, this helps prove my point that the> > works of the Mound Builders are poorly understood, even by the experts> .> > The Mound Builders are well known for building with stone. There is> > > > absolutely an archaeological consensus for this. The Adena ,> > Hopewell and Fort Ancient cultures built massive stone wall complexes,> stone> > > > mounds and often stone temple chambers within earthen mounds. The> > > Butler Co. site, Miami Co. site, Fort Hill, Spruce Hill and the Old> Stone> > > Fort at Tennessee are a few of the well known and universally> accepted> > > stone works of Ancient America. Spruce Hill was a 140 acre hilltop> with a> > > two and a quarter mile-long stone wall around the perimeter. A map> of> > the site is listed in the Smithsonian's 12th annual ethnology report> by> > > the respected Cyrus Thomas who also mapped the stone fort at Flint> > ridge.> > > > All this info can be seen in Norman Mueller's Glenford Stone Fort> > and other Stone Constructions in Ohio and Beyond. From the History of> > > Perry County Ohio 1902 is a description of the Adena stone hilltop> > enclosure and stone burial mound. "Archeologists from all over the> land have> > > > visited here and the consensus of opinion is that the Glenford> site> > is> one of the most wonderful of fortifications....it is a fraction> over> > > 27 acres. It is made entirely of stone." Also from Gerard Fowke's> > > > Antiquities of MO. 1902 pg 65, "So far as the ability to work in> > stone is concerned, some stone chambers which exist in Pike County MO.> > have been mentioned as examples of the skill of the Mound Builders in> > this respect." Fowkes work is widely known and published in> Smithsonian> > > > Ethnology Reports. There is complete consensus within mainstream> > > > archaeology that the Mound Builders built many structures of> stone.> > > > Looks like you might have to vet your experts a little better. 3.> To> > > > state to me that you cannot carbon date stone is insulting ,> clearly> > > > only organic material such as charcoal and bone fragments can be> > > > carbon dated. I in fact read a report in my talk from highly> respected and> > > > award winning Geochrom labs in Massachusetts about the Mystery> Hill> > > > site in New Hampshire. May 30th 1966 sample # GX-1608 submitted by> Robert> > > > Stone as given by Archaeologist Jim Whitall. Harold W. Kruger> > > > technical director of Geochron states "you have found something> very> > interesting from this site with a rather old date of 2995 B.P." Kruger> states> > that there is a quite an adequate amount of material for dating. Date> was> > > > 2995 B.P. +/- 180 C-14 years. Whitall also excavated carbon> remains> > > from the Putney VT. stone chamber that yielded a date of 492 A.D.> and> > > > excavated one of the oldest burial mound sites in the country, the> > > > Morrill Point site in Salisbury Ma. He found three human skeletons> > and artifacts as well as conclusively proving a stone wall at the site> > > > through carbon dating of layers of organic material is at least> 900> > > > years old. The Maritime Archaic site at Morrill Point proved to be> > > 7500 years old and before Mr. Whitall passed away he was joined by> Dr.> > > Bruce Bourque and the highly regarded Dr. William Fitzhugh of the> > > Smithsonian to make sure he received credit for his amazing> discovery. The> > L'Anse Amour stone burial mound in Labrador was expertly dated and> > > universally recognized as being built 7500 years ago proving that> stonework in> > the northeast goes back at least this far. All this information is> > readily available for anyone to see. I know a story about a bit of> > > > pseudoscience. How about the Clovis Barrier, the crowning> > achievement of Archaeology, rammed down our throat for 70 years now> proven> > > > incontrovertibly false. If you questioned this for years you were> > > > considered a crank and a fool. Do you think a possible revaluation> > > > of other theories that are riddled with unexplained anomalies may> > happen soon. The only thing I ask for a fair and open discussion of> > anomalies but the system always demonizes the one who points these> out,> > engages in personal attacks and a misdirection away from the evidence.> Does> > > anyone have Galileo's email address?4. I stated that some> researchers> > believe that the mound builder culture that started in Watson Brake> La. in> > > > roughly 3400 B.C. may have been influenced by contact with> societies> > > in the Yucatan or actual migrations northward by members of that> > > > civilization. In fact there is conclusive proof of trade routes> > > covering thousands of miles in Ancient America as evidence from> artifact> > finds at Hopewell sites in Illinois. Mississippian era earthen pyramid> temple> > > > building clearly resembles Mesoamerican stone pyramids and huge> > plazas such as the one at Cahokia make it perfectly reasonable to> assume a> > > > possible, more southerly influence at some time. The geometry and> > > > astronomical orientations of the Mound Builders are widely> accepted-> > > see Bradley Leper the curator of Archaeology at the Ohio Historical> > > > Societies work and Lively and Horn's research on the Newark> Octagon.5> > > I, along with many other researchers who have written books on this> > > > matter have collected thousands of accounts in town histories, NYT> > > > articles, the Smithsonian's Ethnology reports, Scientific American> > and American Antiquarian of giant skeletal remains being discovered.> > Many of these with anatomic anomalies such as double rows of teeth.> This> > > occurs not just in 1840 but through decades of time and across> thousands of> > > > miles. The discoveries continued throughout the 1920's, 30's, 40's> > and into the 60's. Don Dragoo was directly affiliated with the> Carnegie> > > > museum of Natural History from the years 1952-1977. He is> considered> > > the last of the great Adena scholars and by the end of his career> was> > > named curator of the Carnegie's Section of Anthropology. The> following is> > a quote from his Mounds for the Dead. "Two outstanding traits have> > been noted repeatedly for this group. One is the protruding and> massive> > > chin often with prominent bilateral protrusions. (Webb and Snow,> 1959 pg.> > > > 37). The second is the large size of many of the males and some of> > the females. A male of six feet was common and some individuals> > > approaching seven feet have been found. Not only were these Adena> people tall> > but the massiveness of the bones indicates powerfully built> individuals.> > > The head was generally big with a large cranial capacity." Warren K.> > > > Morehead the " Dean of American Archaeology" unearthed giant> > skeletons in Illinois, Connecticut and Pennsylvania. I showed accounts> of all> > > > three in my presentation. At Tioga Point Pennsylvania. he> uncovered> > 68 skeletons averaging over 7 feet with many much larger, specimens> > were sent to the American Investigating Museum where they were later> > > reported stolen. Ralph Glidden working for the Heye Foundation> unearthed> > 3,781 skeletons averaging 7 feet with the largest 9 foot 2 inches on> > > Catalina Island CA. I have numerous pictures of these finds> including a> > picture from the Santa Barbara museum in 1959 of these giant skeleton> finds.> > > > This is not a case of gigantism, countless accounts speak of> dozens> > of skeletons being uncovered, often with bizarre anatomic anomalies.> > Alex Hrdlicka, the first head of the Smithsonian Division of> Anthropology> > > > starting in 1903 closed the door on the matter of giant skeletal> > finds being reported. He guided the Smithsonian to attack and> marginalize> > > all this information but he could not erase the Smithsonian's own> > > Ethnology reports so he claimed that "giants are no more" and that> an> > inability to measure correctly and understand human anatomy properly> was the> > reason why these things were previously reported. Hrdlicka believed in> > > Pre-Nazi eugenics, thought no civilization existed in America before> 4000> > years ago and zealously attacked and intimidated anyone who challenged> > these ideas- calling Louis Leaky a heretic to his face and destroying> the> > > > career of Warren K. Morehead. Hrdlicka is quoted in the Science> News> > > > Letter v13 #353 1928 p21 as claiming "the greatest danger before> the> > > > American people is the blending of the Negro tenth of the> population> > > > into the superior blood of the white race." In 1937 he published> > > > findings in his Journal of Physical Anthropology to "prove that> the> > > > negro race is phylogenetically a closer approach to primitive man> > than the white race." And just for good measure in 1927 endorsed> findings> > > > comparing African babies with young apes. Before Hrdlicka's reign> > > there were no denials of giant skeleton finds. Hrdlicka along with> many of> > > his white supremacist colleagues at the Institution purged new> evidence> > > and marginalized and intimidated all who stood in the way of> portraying> > > the races of Ancient America as anything other than unsophisticated.> > > Through cranial measurement Hrdlicka concluded that Native Americans> along> > > with African Americans were inferior to the white race. As geologist> Kirk> > > > Bryan told his students during the reign of Hrdrickla "if you ever> > > find evidence of human life in a context which is ancient, bury it> > > carefully but do not forget about it."(from The First American: A> study of> > North American Archaeology 1971.) Anthropologists and Archaeologists> do> > not recognize this phenomena, they are reading texts and scientific> > > journals that have been censored of these accounts. Professionals> read over> > and over again about normal sized accounts and rightfully think the> > whole thing is preposterous. I never claimed that all the Mound> Builders> > > were giants or that they were the architects of the mounds. I am> simply> > > > stating that there were thousands of giant skeletal remains> > uncovered in Ancient America oftentimes in the burial mounds such as> the Grave> > > Creek mound in WV. From the Charleston Daily Mail October 22nd 1922,> > > > "Archaeologists investigating the mound dug out a skeleton of a> > > female. The skeleton was 7 foot 4 inches tall and the jawbone would> easily> > fit over the face of a man weighing 160 pounds. An 8 foot male> skeleton> > > was also found." Once again, this strange anatomic anomaly of a> massive> > > > jawbone like I found throughout the town histories of New> England.6> > I believe response 5 also answers 6, I will say however you mention> > > > redditskeptic as a source of your investigation. The site> > specializes in a series of ad hominem attacks, bad faith arguments,> invisible> > battles with straw men and personal insults. Essentially an endless> stream> > of infantile drivel, it is not a place for objective and open-minded> > > > evaluation of evidence by anyone's standards. They continually> > assail Deepak Chopra for scientifically unproven theories such as the> > reality of "Chakras". By your new standards I suppose you will have to> take> > > down his talks also, he certainly endorses theories determined> > > > pseudoscientific by professionals.7 Bones crumbling to dust is> > > something to be found over and over again in the historical> literature> > including the Smithsonian's own Ethnology reports. I was reaching for> words> > such as mummification or preservation trying to theorize why some> bones> > > > crumbled to dust and others didn't. I was just trying to share> that> > > many remains were measured, examined often determined to have> strange> > > > anatomic anomalies before they crumbled to dust, some but by no> > means all.8 Did the expert who visited the Smithsonian's museums> support> > > > center happen to make it over to the David H. Koch's Hall of Human> > > > Origins permanent installation, where an interactive game tells us> > > that in the future humans may adapt to climate change by "building> > > > underground cities, growing short compact bodies with curved> spines> > to better move around in tight spaces." I am not talking about> mermaids> > > and Barnum and Bailey hoaxes, were there over one hundred mermaid> > accounts from leading scientists of the time published in the New York> Times?> > I am talking about thousands of accounts from the likes of Moorehead,> > > > Webb, Dragoo, Norris, other Anthropologists, Archaeologists,> > > Professors, Doctors, Chief Justices and ordinary citizens. They were> reporting> > > what they saw before their own eyes not a discussion of their> religious> > and political beliefs. How do you tell someone who puts a skull over> > their head, fits a jawbone over their face or reports double rows of> teeth> > > > that they don't understand human anatomy? Your reasons for pulling> > my video are an attempt to portray me as an unsophisticated amateur> > that was taken in by some grand hoax. What I did was read through a> > series of town history, Smithsonian Ethnology and NYT reports. I was> not> > > > advocating a tricky, dangerous and unproven health cure but just> > > trying to share interesting information from the leading and most> respected> > > > Scientific Journals and sources of the time. Any disinterested> > > teenager can assemble a hundred of these accounts over a weekend> with the> > help of Google books. I have a large number of accounts that state> that the> > > > Smithsonian in fact received many of these giant skeletal remains.> > So, why again was my video taken down? The bottom line is that I guess> > > this is not an idea worth sharing because it reveals corruption and> > > cover-ups at an institution whose misguided actions are open for> anyone to see> > > > with a little historical detective work. Not wanting to speak with> > me or allow me to debate these reasons before removing the video is> very> > > > troubling. I would hope you would do me the professional courtesy> of> > > > whenever or wherever you list the reasons my talk was taken down> you> > > > also allow people to see my response. "When a well packaged web of> > > lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the> truth> > will seem utterly preposterous and it's speaker a raving lunatic."> > Dresden James. Thank you,James E. Vieira"> > > >> > >> >> http://www.facebook.com/pages/Stone-Builders-Mound-Builders-and-the-Gian\> ts-of-Ancient-America/556606251021542?ref=stream> > > >> > > > Susan English -- sent from my iPad> > > >> > >> >>